231 
S93n 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 
THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 
LOS  ANGELES 


A  NARRATIVE 


OF  THE 


LEADING  INCIDENTS  OF  THE  ORGANIZATION 


OF  THE  FIRST 


Popular  Movement  in  Virginia 


IN  1865 


TO 


RE-ESTABLISH   PEACEFUL  RELATIONS  BETWEEN  THE 

NORTHERN  AND  SOUTHERN  STATES,  AND  OF 

THE  SUBSEQUENT  EFFORTS 


OF  THE 


<  4 


Committee  of  Nine,"  in  1869, 


TO  SECURE  THE 


RESTORATION  OF  VIRGINIA  TO  THE  UNION, 


BY 


ALEX.  H.  H.  STUART. 


MDCCCLXXXVIII. 

WM.    ELLIS    JONES,    BOOK    AND   JOB    PRINTER. 
RICHMOND,  VA. 


A  NARRATIVE. 


CHAPTER   I. 

Several  years  ago  the  Virginia  Historical  Society  adopted  a  reso- 
lution, of  which  the  following  is  a  copy  : 

Resolved,  That  the  Hon.  A.  H.  H.  Stuart  be  requested  to  prepare  for  this 
Society  a  history  of  the  events  of  1869,  which  led  to  a  restoration  of  this 
State  to  its  place  in  the  Union,  in  which  he  himself  bore  so  distinguished  a 
part. 

An  official  copy  of  this  resolution  was  sent  to  me,  to  which  I 
replied,  expressing  my  willingness  to  comply  with  the  request  of  the 
Society  at  as  early  a  day  as  might  be  practicable,  and  at  once  I  pro- 
ceeded to  collect  such  papers  as  I  thought  would  be  necessary  to 
enable  me  to  do  so.  But,  unfortunately,  sickness  and  other  causes 
compelled  me  to  postpone  the  fulfillment  of  my  promise  to  a  future 
day.  Time  having  brought  improved  health  and  spirits,  I  now 
venture  to  enter  on  the  performance  of  the  task  so  long  delayed. 

In  the  outset,  I  wish  it  to  be  distinctly  understood  that  I  do  not, 
propose  to  write  a  full  history  of  all  that  occurred  in  connection  with 
the  "events  of  1869"  referred  to  in  the  resolution  of  the  Society. 
I  have  not  the  material  necessary  for  such  a  history.  Doubtless  many 
things  were  said  and  done  by  others  looking  to  the  same  end,  of 
which  I  had  no  knowledge.  All  that  I  propose  to  do  in  this  paper 
is  to  give  a  narrative  of  the  leading  facts  and  incidents  relating  to 
the  subject,  so  far  as  I  was  personally  connected  with  or  had  cogni- 
zance of  them,  accompanied  by  such  papers  as  may  be  necessary  to 
verify  and  explain  them. 

As  I  shall  speak  mainly  of  matters  in  which  I  was  an  actor  or  wit- 
ness, it  will  readily  be  conceded  that  my  statement  should  be  made 
in  the  first  person  singular. 

But  I  should  feel  that  my  work  had  been  very  imperfectly  done  it 
I  failed,  before  entering  on  my  narrative  of  the  "events"  especially 
referred  to  in  the  resolution  of  the  Society,  to  refer  to  others  of  an 


223918 


4  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION. 

antecedent  date,  which  were  not  less  important  than  the  "  events  of 
1869,"  and  which,  in  fact,  opened  the  way  for  them.  A  knowledge 
of  these  facts  is  necessary  to  enable  the  reader  to  understand  the 
condition  of  public  affairs  in  1868-' 9.  They  supply  an  important 
link  in  the  history  of  Virginia,  from  the  downfall  of  the  Confederacy 
to  the  restoration  of  the  State  to  the  Union.  I  deem  it  proper  to 
refer  to  these  events,  not  only  on  account  of  their  intrinsic  interest  as 
matters  of  history,  but  because  no  permanent  record  has  been  made 
of  them,  and  they  are  liable  to  be  forgotten,  with  the  men  who  par- 
ticipated in  them. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  it  was  the  practice  of  General  David 
Hunter,  in  his  raid  through  Virginia,  to  destroy  all  the  newspaper 
offices  by  breaking  up  their  presses  and  scattering  their  type  in  the 
streets.  The  publication  of  newspapers  was  in  this  way  effectually 
suppressed;  and  in  Staunton,  the  place  of  my  residence,  the  only 
means  of  printing  anything  was  by  an  old  hand-press,  which  had 
escaped  the  notice  of  the  destroyer,  and  such  type  as  had  been 
rescued  from  the  gutter  into  which  it  had  been  thrown.  Thus  no 
record  of  passing  events  was  preserved  in  files  of  newspapers,  issued 
from  day  to  day,  and  the  only  authentic  report  of  the  proceedings  of 
one  of  the  most  important  popular  meetings  ever  held  in  Augusta 
county  is  to  be  found  in  a  few  copies  of  an  unsightly  hand-bill, 
which  was  printed  on  the  day  after  it  was  held,  with  tHe  press  and 
type  above  referred  to. 

As  this  meeting  set  on  foot  the  first  organized  popular  movement 
for  "peace,"  I  cannot  doubt  that  I  will  render  an  acceptable  service 
to  the  public  by  putting  the  record  of  its  proceedings  in  a  more  en- 
during form,  and  placing  it  under  the  guardianship  of  the  Virginia 
Historical  Society. 

The  meeting  to  which  I  refer,  was  a  large  assemblage  of  the  best 
people  of  Augusta  county,  held  at  their  courthouse  in  Staunton  on 
8th  of  May,  1865,  in  pursuance  of  a  notice  which  had  been  circulated 
as  widely  as  possible  during  the  preceding  week. 

The  circumstances  under  which  the  meeting  was  held  were  these: 
While  intelligent  and  thoughtful  men,  who  were  correctly  informed 
as  to  the  exhausted  condition  of  the  Confederate  treasury,  of  the 
absence  of  supplies  of  food,  clothing,  arms,  and  ammunition  neces- 
sary to  maintain  an  army  in  the  field,  and,  above  all,  of  the  disparity 
of  numbers  and  equipment  of  the  troops  which  were  arrayed  under 
the  banners  of  Grant  and  Lee  respectively  at  the  opening  of  the 
campaign  of  1865,  had  been  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  the  days 


RESTORATION    OF    VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION.  5 

of  the  Confederacy  were  numbered,  such  was  not  the  belief  among 
the  masses  of  the  people  in  the  country.  They  had  been  misled  to 
some  extent  by  the  defiant  attitude  assumed  by  the  Confederate 
Government,  and  in  larger  measure  by  their  unbounded  confidence 
in  the  abilities  of  their  great  leaders,  Lee  and  Johnston,  and  their 
associates,  which  caused  them  still  to  cling  to  the  hope  of  final 
success. 

When,  therefore,  it  became  known  to  the  people  of  Virginia,  in 
April,  1865,  that  President  Davis  and  his  Cabinet  and  other  execu- 
tive officers  of  the  Confederate  Government,  and  Governor  William 
Smith  and  the  other  State  officers  of  Virginia,  had  been  compelled 
to  withdraw  from  Richmond,  and  that  General  Lee  had  been  obliged 
to  evacuate  the  city  and  retreat  southward  with  the  remnant  of  his 
starving  army — followed  as  this  news  was,  in  a  few  days,  by  intelli- 
gence of  the  surrender  of  General  Lee's  army  at  Appomattox,  and 
he  capitulation  of  General  Johnston  and  his  army — the  tidings  fell 
on  the  popular  ear  like  a  "fireball  in  the  night,"  filling  the  public 
mind  with  consternation  and  dismay  ! 

Men  of  forecast  saw  at  once  that  the  Confederate  cause  was  lost, 
and  that  a  continuance  of  the  struggle  was  hopeless  and  could  result 
only  in  a  wanton  waste  of  blood  and  treasure,  and  an  aggravation  of 
the  calamities  which  were  inevitable.  They  saw,  further,  that  we 
had  been  reduced  to  the  sad  condition  of  a  people  without  any 
government,  State  or  Federal.  The  Confederate  Government  had 
practically  ceased  to  exist.  The  State  Government  had  been  over- 
thrown. The  officers  of  both  were  refugees,  and  there  was  no 
reasonable  prospect  of  the  re-establishment  of  either.  Every  social 
bond  had  been  ruptured.  Society  had  been  resolved  into  its  original 
elements.  All  laws  had  become  inoperative  for  want  of  officers  to 
enforce  them.  All  the  safeguards  of  life,  liberty,  and  property  had 
been  uprooted.  Scenes  of  lawless  violence  and  rapine  were  rife  in 
the  country.  There  were  no  officials  who  would  be  recognized  as 
having  authority  to  represent  the  people  or  to  give  expression  to 
their  opinions  and  wishes. 

In  a  word,  a  condition  of  things  had  arisen  in  which,  if  the  people 
wished  their  voice  to  be  heard,  they  must  speak  for  themselves  ! 

Such  was  the  state  of  affairs  which  existed  about  the  first  of  May, 
1865,  when  half  a  dozen  or  more  intelligent  gentlemen  of  Staunton 
met  together,  informally,  to  consider  and  decide  what  should  be 
done  to  meet  the  emergency  which  confronted  them.  After  full  and 
free  discussion  of  the  subject  in  all  its  aspects,  they  concluded  that 


6  RESTORATION   OF  VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

the  wisest  course  would  be  to  convoke  a  mass-meeting  of  the  people 
of  Augusta  county,  to  assemble  at  their  courthouse  on  Monday,  8th 
of  May,  1865,  to  decide  for  themselves. 

Notices  were  accordingly  issued,  inviting  the  people  to  assemble  at 
the  time  and  place  above  mentioned  to  give  formal  expression  to 
their  sentiments  on  the  grave  questions  to  be  submitted  for  their 
consideration.  These  notices  were  widely  circulated  by  means  of 
special  messengers  sent  to  all  parts  of  the  county  during  the  week 
preceding  the  day  appointed  for  the  meeting;  and  on  Sunday,  the 
day  before  it  was  to  be  held,  it  naturally  became  the  topic  of  con- 
versation among  the  people  at  their  homes,  on  the  highways,  and  at 
their  respective  places  of  public  worship.  In  this  way  the  purpose 
to  hold  the  meeting  and  its  objects  became  known  to  almost  every 
man  in  the  county,  and  to  many  in  adjacent  counties. 

Among  those  who  thus  became  acquainted  with  the  purpose  of 
the  people  of  Augusta  to  hold  the  meeting  on  the  8th  of  May,  and 
the  subjects  to  be  considered  by  it,  was  Governor  William  Smith. 
After  he  had  been  obliged  to  leave  Richmond,  before  its  formal 
evacuation,  he  had  sought  refuge  in  a  secluded  part  of  Rockbridge 
county.  On  learning  the  facts  above  stated,  and  doubtless  influenced 
by  a  patriotic  sense  of  official  duty,  he  rode  to  Staunton,  a  distance 
of  twenty-five  miles  or  more,  where  he  arrived  about  noon  on  Sun- 
day, yth  May.  Soon  after  his  arrival,  he  sent  invitations  to  a  number 
of  gentlemen  who  had  been  most  active  in  getting  up  the  "  mass- 
meeting,"  requesting  them  to  call  on  him  at  his  hotel  at  3  o'clock 
P.  M.  for  conference. 

I  was  one  of  those  invited,  and  at  the  hour  appointed,  accompa- 
nied by  fifteen  or  twenty  other  gentlemen,  went  to  the  hotel,  where 
we  were  politely  received  by  the  Governor.  After  the  ordinary 
interchange  of  salutations  and  introductions,  Governor  Smith  pro- 
ceeded to  open  the  interview  by  referring  to  the  rumors  he  had 
heard  of  the  proposed  meeting  and  its  objects.  Without  expressing 
any  opinion,  either  favorable  or  unfavorable,  to  the  objects  which  we 
had  in  view,  he  made  known,  in  decided  terms,  his  opposition  to  our 
holding  it,  on  the  ground  that  the  proceeding  would  be  irregular, 
and,  to  some  extent,  revolutionary.  He  referred  to  the  fact  that  he 
was  the  Governor  of  Virginia,  and  as  such  the  constitutional  repre- 
sentative of  the  State,  and  the  only  person  empowered  to  open 
negotiations  with  the  Federal  authorities  to  secure  peace  and  the 
restoration  of  the  State  to  the  Union.  He  insisted  it  was  not  com- 
petent for  the  people  of  any  single  county  to  inaugurate  such  a 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION.  7 

movement,  thereby  ignoring  him  and  his  constitutional  powers  and 
duties  as  chief  executive  officer  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  therefore 
urged  us  to  abandon  the  idea  of  holding  the  proposed  meeting. 

In  reply,  it  was  stated  that  while  under  a  normal  condition  of 
public  affairs,  in  which  he  would  be  recognized  as  the  lawful  Gov- 
ernor of  the  State  of  Virginia,  his  views  would  be  entitled  to  great 
weight,  yet  we  thought  it  was  obvious  that  he  who  had  been  a  distin- 
guished general  in  the  military  service  of  the  Confederate  States, 
and  who  had  been  elected  Governor  of  one  of  the  Confederate  States, 
under  the  auspices  of  the  Confederacy,  and  had  taken  an  oath  of 
allegiance  to  its  government,  could  not  possibly  be  recognized  by 
the  Federal  Government  as  the  lawful  Governor  and  constitutional 
representative  of  the  State  of  Virginia  under  the  new  order  of  things. 
Such  a  recognition  would  be  almost  equivalent  to  a  recognition  of 
the  Confederate  Government  itself.  All  purpose  to  ignore  him  or 
offer  him  any  personal  disrespect  was  earnestly  disclaimed;  but  facts 
were  stubborn  things,  which  could  not  be  ignored.  They  must  be 
dealt  with  as  they  existed.  The  Confederate  Government  had  col- 
lapsed, and  there  was  no  reasonable  prospect  of  its  ever  being 
re-established.  The  State  Government  had  been  overthrown.  We 
were,  therefore,  without  any  government  and  liable  at  any  time  to  be 
overwhelmed  by  all  the  horrors  of  anarchy.  We  had  no  representa- 
tives who  would  be  recognized  as  having  a  right  to  speak  for  the 
people,  and  hence  they  must  speak  for  themselves.  He  was  told  he 
was  mistaken  in  supposing  that  the  people  of  Augusta  proposed  to 
act  on  behalf  of  the  State.  They  claimed  no  such  right.  They 
meant  only  to  give  expression  to  the  sentiments  and  wishes  of  the 
county  of  Augusta,  leaving  every  other  county  free  to  take  such 
action  as  its  people  might  deem  proper.  The  demand  for  prompt 
and  decided  action  by  the  people  was  urgent.  They  could  not  afford 
to  wait  for  the  result  of  tedious  and  probably  ineffectual  diplomatic 
negotiation,  and  therefore  we  must  persist  in  holding  the  proposed 
meeting.  The  conference  then  closed,  without  unkind  feeling  on 
either  side,  for  each  respected  the  motives  of  the  other,  and  Governor 
Smith  returned  to  Rockbridge. 

Before  dismissing  the  subject  of  this  interview,  it  may  be  proper  to 
say  that  the  sequel  proved  the  soundness  of  the  reasoning  of  the 
advocates  of  the  meeting  and  the  fallacy  of  that  of  Governor  Smith. 

The  meeting  having  been  held  on  the  8th  of  May,  and  a  com- 
mittee appointed  to  go  to  Richmond  to  confer  with  the  military 
authorities,  it  was  received  with  courtesy  and  attention  by  the  gen- 


8  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO  THE    UNION. 

eral  in  command  as  representing  the  people.  But  when  Governor 
Smith  shortly  afterwards,  in  his  official  character,  appointed  com- 
missioners to  negotiate  with  the  military  authorities,  as  soon  as  these 
gentlemen  presented  their  credentials  they  were  arrested  and  held  as 
prisoners,  and  a  reward  of  $25.000  was  offered  for  the  capture  of  the 
Governor  and  the  delivery  of  his  person  to  the  officer  in  command  ! 
But,  to  the  honor  of  our  people,  it  must  be  added  that  no  one  could 
be  tempted,  even  by  such  a  munificent  reward,  to  play  the  part  of 
Judas  Iscariot ! 

After  the  close  of  the  conference  with  Governor  Smith  on  Sunday 
afternoon  (jth  May,  1865),  I  was  notified  that  it  was  the  wish  of  the 
gentlemen  who  had  been  most  active  in  getting  up  the  meeting  on 
the  8th  that  I  should  preside  over  its  deliberations,  and  that  on 
taking  the  chair  I  should  make  an  address  to  the  people,  explaining 
the  objects  and  purposes  of  those  who  called  it,  with  such  sugges- 
tions as  to  the  policy  to  be  pursued  as  I  might  deem  appropriate. 

After  careful  consideration,  I  concluded  that  in  view  of  the  gravity 
and  importance  of  the  questions  to  be  submitted  to  the  meeting,  and 
of  the  liability  of  an  oral  address  to  be  misunderstood  and  misrepre- 
sented, it  would  be  best  to  commit  to  writing  what  I  proposed  to  say. 
The  occasion  involved  weighty  responsibilities.  It  was  proper  that 
the  words  used  should  be  not  only  well  weighed,  but  plain  and  sim- 
ple, such  as  could  be  readily  understood  by  all  who  might  be  present. 
Another  fact  admonished  me  of  the  necessity  for  caution.  A  large 
body  of  Federal  troops  occupied  the  town  of  Harrisonburg,  twenty- 
five  miles  distant,  and  I  felt  confident  that  a  number  of  their  enter- 
prising "Jesse  Scouts"  would  be  present  as  vigilant  spectators  and 
reporters  of  the  proceedings  of  the  meeting.  I  therefore  wrote  in 
advance  the  address  which  I  proposed  to  make. 

At  an  early  hour  on  the  8th  of  May,  the  people  began  to  assemble 
in  the  streets  and  public  grounds  near  the  courthouse  to  interchange 
opinions  and  discuss  the  great  questions  which  they  had  been  invited 
to  consider  and  decide.  Their  solemn  countenances  and  earnest 
demeanor  indicated  that  they  clearly  understood  and  appreciated  the 
gravity  of  the  situation. 

Before  the  hour  of  12  M.,  which  had  been  appointed  for  the  organi- 
zation of  the  meeting,  a  great  crowd  had  assembled  in  the  court- 
house, which  embodied  a  large  share  of  the  intelligence,  patriotism 
and  property  of  the  county.  It  was  in  all  respects  a  representative 
meeting,  and  therefore  entitled  to  give  authentic  expression  to  the 
sentiments  and  wishes  of  the  people  of  the  county. 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION.  9 

Punctually  at  12  o'clock  the  meeting  was  called  to  order,  and  the 
chairman  and  secretaries  nominated  and  elected. 

Having  been  chosen  as  chairman,  after  a  brief  explanation  of  the 
reasons  which  had  induced  me  to  reduce  to  writing  the  address  which 
I  was  about  to  make  to  the  meeting,  I  proceeded  to  read  it  from  the 
manuscript,  which  I  did  slowly  and  distinctly  so  that  every  word 
could  be  heard  and  understood  by  the  large  and  attentive  audience. 
After  it  had  thus  been  read,  at  the  request  of  the  secretaries  I  deliv- 
ered the  manuscript  to  them  to  be  incorporated  into  their  report  of 
the  proceedings.  These  proceedings  were  faithfully  and  accurately 
recorded  by  the  secretaries,  and  as  there  was  no  newspaper  published 
in  Staunton  at  that  time,  they  were  printed  on  the  following  day  in 
hand-bills  on  the  little  hand-press,  to  which  I  have  already  referred, 
and  many  copies  were  sent  to  representative  men  in  other  counties. 
A  copy  of  that  hand-bill  is  now  before  me,  and  will  be  annexed  to  this 
narrative.  It  is  in  the  following  words  : 

MASS-MEETING  OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  AUGUSTA  ! 

In  pursuance  of  a  public  notice,  which  had  been  extensively  circulated,  a 
large  and  respectable  meeting  of  the  people  of  Augusta  county  assembled 
at  the  courthouse  on  Monday,  8th  of  May,  "  to  take  measures  looking  to  a 
reorganization  of  the  government  of  Virginia  in  conformity  to  the  Consti- 
tution and  laws  of  the  United  States." 

On  motion  of  Colonel  Wm.  A.  Bell,  Hon.  ALEX.  H.  H.  STUART  was  called 
to  the  chair  and  Dr.  THOS.  W.  SHELTON  and  W.  H.  H.  LYNN  were  appointed 
secretaries. 

On  taking  the  chair,  Mr.  Stuart  spoke  substantially  as  follows : 

Fellow  Citizens : — We  have  met  together  to-day  to  decide  what  course 
we  ought  to  pursue  under  the  peculiar  circumstances  by  which  we  are  sur- 
rounded. 

The  war  which  has  raged  throughout  our  land  for  four  years  past,  and  has 
left  so  many  evidences  of  its  desolating  power  in  every  part  of  it,  has  at 
length  ceased.  The  veteran  armies  of  Lee  and  Johnston  have  capitulated 
and  a  similar  fate  doubtless  awaits,  if  it  has  not  already  befallen,  the  Confed- 
erate forces  west  of  the  Mississippi.  The  President  of  the  Confederate  States 
and  his  Cabinet  have  been  constrained  to  abandon  the  seat  of  government, 
without  any  reasonable  prospect  of  being  able  to  re-establish  themselves  and 
resume  the  exercise  of  their  functions  in  any  of  the  Southern  States. 

The  Governor  of  Virginia  has  also  withdrawn  himself  from  the  capitol, 
taking  with  him  most  of  the  principal  officers  of  the  State  Government. 

There  has  thus  been  a  virtual  abdication  of  the  Confederate  Government 
and  a  suspension  of  the  functions  of  the  authorities  of  the  State. 

In  this  anomalous  condition  of  things,   when  those  officers  who  were 


10  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO    THE    UNION. 

chosen  to  represent  the  people  and  to  be  the  guardians  of  their  rights  and 
interests  have  lost  the  power  to  do  so,  it  becomes  the  duty  of  the  people  to 
speak  for  themselves,  and  to  determine  what  measures  may  be  best  for  the 
advancement  of  their  safety  and  welfare. 

All  must  admit  that  the  war  is  ended,  and  that  there  is  no  purpose  to 
resume  military  operations.  The  recent  surrenders  of  Generals  Lee  and 
Johnston  embraced  much  the  larger  number  of  the  experienced  and  skilful 
officers  of  the  Southern  army,  and  the  articles  of  capitulation  and  arrange- 
ments subsequently  entered  into  have  placed  almost  the  entire  organized 
military  force  east  of  the  Mississippi  under  obligations  not  to  take  up  arms 
against  the  United  States  until  regularly  exchanged. 

We  are  thus  in  the  extraordinary  condition  of  a  people  deprived  of  the 
benefit  of  any  regular  government,  either  civil  or  military.  The  tendency 
of  such  a  state  of  things  is  to  disorder  and  anarchy  In  some  instances 
marauding  parties  of  armed  men  have  plundered  our  citizens  and  acts  of 
violence  have  been  committed,  which  are  calculated  to  create  a  sense  of 
insecurity  amongst  our  people. 

Under  these  circumstances,  we  are  assembled  to  consider  what  course  we 
shall  adopt  to  secure  the  best  protection  of  person  and  property  and  the 
largest  measure  of  our  rights,  both  personal  and  political,  which  may  be 
practicable. 

It  has  been  suggested  that  our  wisest  course  is  to  do  nothing,  but  to  await 
the  development  of  events.  I  do  not  approve  this  suggestion.  I  think  we 
should  endeavor  as  far  as  we  can  to  give  shape  and  direction  to  our  own 
destiny.  If  we  fail,  we  will  at  least  save  ourselves  the  reproach  of  not  having 
made  an  effort  to  do  so.  Those  who  advocate  a  policy  merely  passive,  seem 
to  act  on  the  idea  that  we  have  lost  all  our  rights  and  must  accept  such  form 
of  government  as  may  be  imposed  on  us.  This  notion  arises  from  the  fact 
that  those  who  entertain  it  confound  the  ideas  of  POWER  and  RIGHT,  which 
are  two  very  different  things.  A  victorious  party  may  have  the  power  to 
impose  an  obnoxious  form  of  government  on  its  defeated  adversary,  but  it 
by  no  means  follows  that  it  has  the  right  to  do  so. 

In  my  judgment,  it  is  proper  that  the  people  of  Virginia  should  express  in 
public  meetings— the  only  mode  left  to  them  of  giving  authentic  expression 
to  their  sentiments — their  recognition  of  the  fact  that  the  war  has  ceased, 
finally  ceased ;  that  the  attempted  revolution  has  finally  failed,  and  that 
there  is  no  purpose  on  their  part  to  renew  it. 

When  it  is  thus  made  manifest  that  the  people  accept  the  fate,  which  in 
the  fortunes  of  war  has  befallen  them,  that  the  war  is  over  and  that  they  are 
prepared  to  recognize  the  authority  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
from  that  moment  our  relations  to  the  United  States  Government  are  mate- 
rially modified,  and  rights  which  may  have  remained  in  abeyance  during 
the  continuance  of  hostilities  are  immediately  revived  in  full  force  and 
vigor. 

When  the  war  is  at  an  end,  all  those  powers  claimed  as  war  powers  and 
as  matters  of  military  necessity  must  cease  with  it. 

The  restoration  of  peace  will  bring  up  for  discussion  and  decision  many 
novel  and  complicated  questions.  The  experience  and  the  precedents  de- 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO    THE    UNION.  11 

rived  from  the  history  of  other  nations  will  furnish  very  insufficient  guides 
in  their  solution,  because  the  history  of  the  world  affords  no  case  that  is 
parallel  to  ours.  In  other  countries  the  relation  of  the  citizen  or  subject  to 
his  government  is  simple  and  direct.  He  owes  allegiance  to  but  one  gov- 
ernment— under  our  complex  system  every  citizen  owes  allegiance  to  two 
governments.  Before  the  war  every  citizen  owed  allegiance  to  his  State  as 
well  as  to  the  United  States.  He  was  bound  to  defend  both.  It  was  thus  a 
double  or  a  divided  allegiance  with  the  line  of  demarcation  not  very  dis- 
tinctly defined.  When,  therefore,  a  conflict  occurred  it  was  not  always  easy 
tO'determine  the  path  of  duty  or  safe  to  pursue  it,  for  what  was  obedience 
to  the  one  might  be  treason  against  the  other. 

The  war  having  terminated  and  the  Confederate  government  having 
potentially  ceased  to  exist,  we  are  released  from  all  claim  of  allegiance 
to  it  and  remitted  to  our  rights  as  citizens  of  Virginia.  What  may  be  the 
extent  of  those  rights,  or  how  far  any  individual  may  have  forfeited  his 
rights,  may  be  a  question  to  be  determined  hereafter  in  the  mode  prescribed 
by  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  One  thing,  however,  we  may 
safely  assume.  A  State  in  its  political  capacity  cannot  commit  treason.  A 
State  as  a  political  community  cannot  incur  forfeitures.  Treason  can  only 
be  committed  by  individuals,  and  the  penalties  can  be  inflicted  on  individuals 
only.  How  far  a  State  can  throw  the  aegis  of  her  protection  over  her  citi- 
zens who  acted  under  her  authority  will  have  to  be  settled  hereafter. 

I  take  it,  therefore,  that  Virginia  still  has  rights  under  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States,  which  have  only  been  suspended  during  the  abortive 
effort  to  sever  her  connection  with  the  United  States,  and  it  seems  to  me  to 
be  our  duty  to  try  and  have  those  rights  recognized  and  respected. 

If  it  be  true,  as  has  been  almost  universally  assumed  in  the  Northern 
States,  that  the  ordinances  of  secession  were  mere  nullities  and  absolutely 
void,  then  the  Southern  States  have  never  severed  their  connection  with  the 
United  States — have  never  been  out  of  the  Union,  and  are  therefore  entitled, 
from  the  moment  the  war  ceases,  to  resume  their  position  as  members  of 
the  Union. 

I  advert  to  these  questions  with  no  view  to  discuss  them,  but  simply  to 
combat  the  idea  that  all  our  rights  have  been  lost  and  as  a  satisfactory  rea- 
son for  meeting  promptly  the  issue  which  has  been  forced  upon  us,  and 
declaring  that  so  far  as  we  are  concerned  (and  we  believe  we  speak  the 
sentiments  of  Virginia)  the  war  has  finally  closed ;  that  we  have  no  purpose 
to  renew  it ;  that  we  are  prepared  to  conform  our  State  government  to  the 
changed  condition  of  public  affairs;  and  that  we  are  convinced  that  by  a 
wise  and  conciliatory  policy  on  the  part  of  the  Federal  authorities,  peace 
and  tranquility  can  soon  be  firmly  and  permanently  re-established. 

After  the  close  of  Mr.  Stuart's  remarks,  on  motion  of  Hugh  W.  Sheffey, 
Esq.,  the  chair  was  instructed  to  appoint  a  committee  of  thirteen  to  prepare 
and  report  suitable  resolutions  for  the  consideration  of  the  meeting. 

The  chair  thereupon  named  the  following  gentlemen  to  constitute  the 
committee. 


12  RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 


NAMES  OF   COMMITTEE. 

H.  W.  Sheffey,  T.  J.  Michie,  Jno.  B.  Baldwin,  W.  M.  Tate,  D.  S.  Bell,  J.  M. 
McCue,  M.  G.  Harman,  H.  G.  Guthrie,  Chesley  Kinney,  Bolivar  Christian, 
George  Baylor,  Absalom  Coiner,  J.  Givens  Fulton. 

After  some  time  spent  in  deliberation,  the  committee  reported  the  follow- 
ing series  of  resolutions : 

RESOLUTIONS. 

1.  Resolved,  That  we  believe  we  express  the  thorough  conviction  of  the 
people  of  Augusta  county,  when  we  declare  that  opposition  to  the  authority 
of  the  United  States  within  this  county  is  at  an  end  and  that  there  is  no  pur- 
pose on  the  part  of  any  of  our  people  to  attempt  any  renewal  of  it. 

2.  Resolved,  That  the  people  of  Augusta  county,  recognizing  the  necessity 
oT  reorganizing  the  government  of  Virginia  so  as  to  conform  to  the  Consti- 
tution and  laws  of  the  United  States,  are  prepared  to  co-operate  in  good 
faith  with  the  people  of  other  portions  of  the  State  for  that  purpose. 

3.  Resolved,  That  in  our  opinion  the  best  mode  of  effecting  the  object 
proposed  is  by  a  State  Convention,  chosen  by  the  voters  and  organized  upon 
the  basis  of  the  House  of  Delegates. 

4.  Resolved,  That  a  committee  of  five  be  appointed  to  go  to  Richmond 
and  ascertain  whether  the  military  authorities  of  the  United  States  will  inter- 
pose any  obstruction  to  the  election,  assembling  and  action  of  such  a  con- 
vention for  the  purpose  indicated,  and  that  the  chairman  of  this  meeting  be 
the  chairman  of  said  committee. 

5.  Resolved,  That  this  committee  be  also  authorized  to  confer  with  similar 
committees  to  be  appointed  in  other  counties,  and  to  adopt  in  concert  such 
measures  as  will  best  promote  the  objects  herein  declared. 

In  pursuance  of  the  request  of  the  committee,  Hon.  John  B.  Baldwin  pro- 
ceeded to  explain  the  nature  and  purport  of  the  resolutions  and  to  urge 
their  adoption  in  a  speech  of  great  power  and  eloquence,  which  produced  a 
profound  impression  on  the  audience. 

After  the  close  of  Colonel  Baldwin's  speech,  no  other  person  manifesting 
any  desire  to  speak,  the  resolutions  were  again  read  to  the  meeting  seriatim, 
and  each  resolution  adopted  by  a  unanimous  vote. 

After  the  other  resolutions  had  been  adopted,  on  motion  of  Bolivar  Chris- 
tian, Esq.,  the  chairman  was  instructed  to  appoint  at  his  leisure  the  members 
of  the  committee  contemplated  by  the  fourth  resolution. 

The  proceedings  of  the  meeting  were  marked  by  great  solemnity  and  dig- 
nity, and  evidently  expressed  the  deliberate  sense  of  the  people  of  Augusta. 
The  assembly  was  a  full  one,  and  embraced  a  large  share  of  the  intelligence 
and  weight  of  the  county. 

ALEX.  H.  H.  STUART,  Chairman. 

THOS.  W.  SHELTON,  \  o--..  .,_„,•„ 

WM.  H.  H.  LYNN,     /  Secretaries. 

I  have  nothing  to  add  to  the  record  made  by  the  secretaries  of  the 
proceedings  of  this  meeting.  It  is  in  all  respects  full  and  accurate. 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE   UNION.  13 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  fourth  resolution  provided  for  the  "  ap- 
pointment of  a  committee  of  five,  of  which  the  chairman  of  the 
meeting  shall  be  chairman,  to  go  to  Richmond  and  ascertain  whether 
the  military  authorities  of  the  United  States  will  interpose  any  objec- 
tion to  the  election  and  assembling  of  a  State  Convention  chosen  on 
the  basis  of  the  House  of  Delegates  " 

By  a  subsequent  resolution  "the  chairman  was  instructed  to 
appoint,  at  his  leisure,  the  other  members  of  the  committee  contem- 
plated by  the  fourth  resolution." 

Under  the  power  thus  conferred  on  me,  I  appointed  as  my  associates 
on  the  committee,  Judge  Hugh  W.  Sheffey,  Colonel  John  B.  Baldwin, 
Colonel  Michael  G.  Harman,  and  Major  William  M.  Tate. 

A  few  days  afterwards  the  committee  went  to  Richmond  and 
sought  an  interview  with  the  military  authorities.  We  were  court- 
eously received,  but  were  informed  that  the  officer  in  command  had 
no  authority  to  consider  or  decide  the  questions  which  were  the  sub- 
jects of  our  mission.  We  were  also  informed  that  Hon.  Francis  H. 
Peirpoint  had  been  recognized  by  the  United  States  Government  as 
Governor  of  Virginia,  and  that  in  a  few  days  he  would  be  in  Rich- 
mond to  enter  on  the  discharge  of  his  duties  ;  and  it  was  suggested 
that  we  had  better  await  his  arrival  and  make  our  communication  to 
him.  We  accordingly  remained  in  Richmond  until  Governor  Peir- 
point had  been  duly  installed  as  Governor  under  military  auspices. 
We  then  called  on  him  and  exhibited  to  him  a  copy  of  the  resolutions 
which  had  been  adopted  by  the  people  of  Augusta,  and  explained 
fully  the  objects  of  our  mission.  A  full  and  free  discussion  of  all  the 
questions  connected  with  the  restoration  of  Virginia  to  the  Union 
ensued,  the  details  of  which  it  is  not  necessary  to  state.  The  Gov- 
ernor, throughout  the  conference,  displayed  an  amicable  and  patriotic 
spirit,  and  closed  the  interview  by  giving  such  assurances  of  sym- 
pathy and  friendly  co-operation  as  were  satisfactory  to  the  committee, 
and  thus  their  mission  closed. 

It  is  proper  to  add  that,  during  the  sojourn  of  the  committee  in 
Richmond,  we  were  met  by  delegates  from  other  counties,  whose 
people,  having  heard  of  the  action  taken  by  the  people  of  Augusta, 
had  hastened  to  hold  similar  meetings  and  select  committees  to  co- 
operate with  us. 

We  also  learned  from  the  newspapers  that  the  people  of  counties 
and  cities  of  other  Southern  States  were  making  movements  of  a 
similar  character  and  with  the  same  end  in  view. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  the  first  organized  popular  movement  for 


14  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA  TO   THE    UNION. 

peace  and  the  restoration  of  Virginia  to  the  Federal  Union  was  made 
by  the  people  of  Augusta  in  their  great  mass-meeting,  on  the  8th  of 
May,  1865. 

Results  proved  that  the  meeting  was  not  only  a  bold  but  a  wise  and 
judicious  movement.  It  dispelled  many  popular  delusions  caused  by 
the  over-confidence  of  the  Confederate  authorities.  It  uncovered 
the  nakedness  of  the  Confederate  cause.  It  awakened  public  thought 
and  gave  a  new  direction  to  public  opinion.  It  illustrated  the  genius 
of  our  institutions  by  a  majestic  exhibition  of  popular  sovereignty. 
When  politicians  faltered  and  were  at  a  loss  what  course  to  take,  the 
people  quietly  took  the  reins  of  government  from  their  hands  and 
acted  for  themselves.  Under  their  guidance  hostilities  ceased  and 
social  order  was  re-established.  And  thus  the  extraordinary  specta- 
cle was  presented  to  the  world  of  a  fierce  and  bloody  war  of  four 
years'  duration  being  substantially  closed  by  the  direct  action  of  the 
people  themselves,  without  the  intervention  of  any  of  the  forms  of 
diplomacy.  And  there  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  but  for  the 
atrocious  murder  of  President  Lincoln,  and  the  exasperated  feeling 
caused  by  it,  the  terms  of  permanent  and  satisfactory  peace  could 
have  been  adjusted  at  an  early  day.  That  deplorable  event,  and  the 
subsequent  quarrels  between  Congress  and  President  Johnson,  ren- 
dered it  impossible  to  make  any  further  movement  for  restoration 
during  his  ill-starred  administration. 

It  may  be  fairly  inferred  from  the  following  letter,  which  was 
addressed  to  me  by  Governor  William  Smith,  dated  2yth  of  February, 
1880,  that  in  the  light  of  subsequent  events  he  had  seen  cause  to 
change  his  opinion  as  to  the  wisdom  of  the  meeting  of  the  people  of 
Augusta  on  the  8th  of  May,  1865.  He  wrote  as  follows  : 

WARRENTON,  February  27,  1880. 
Hon.  A.  H.  H.  STUART  : 

My  Dear  Sir, — I  have  your  very  satisfactory  favor  of  the  asth  instant, 
but  am  sorry  to  have  again  to  trouble  you,  but  I  should  be  very  glad  to 
have  a  copy  of  the  proceedings  of  your  meeting  of  the  8th  of  May,  1865,  as 
I  may  wish  to  publish  it. 

When  I  left  Richmond  the  night  of  2d  of  April,  1865,  it  was  with  the  firm 
resolve  to  do  everything  in  my  power  still  to  change  the  current  of  our  dis- 
asters. With  that  view,  I  declined  President  Davis's  invitation  to  accom- 
pany him  the  night  of  the  evacuation.  With  that  view,  I  ordered  the  Capitol 
officers,  the  Public  Guard,  and  the  State  Cadets  to  report  to  me  in  Lynch- 
burg,  etc.  And  when  they  failed  to  do  so,  it  was  with  this  view  that  I 
followed  President  Davis  to  Greensboro,  North  Carolina,  to  obtain  from 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  15 

him  a  transfer  to  me  of  all  his  authority,  etc.,  in  Virginia.  And  when, 
most  strangely,  after  a  full  explanation  of  my  plans  and  purposes,  he  refused 
my  request,  it  was  still  with  the  same  view,  desperate  as  was  the  prospect, 
that  I  felt  it  to  be  my  duty  to  collect  public  sentiment  in  every  way  I  could, 
traveling  many  a  weary  mile,  and  finally  reaching  your  town  on  the  7th  May, 
1865,  the  time  you  state,  and  no  doubt  correctly,  to  know  if  the  people 
were  willing,  in  any  form,  to  prosecute  the  war  or  quietly  submit.  I  soon 
inferred  from  what  passed  during  the  evening  I  was  with  you  and  friends 
that  your  great  county  was  hopeless,  and  that  all  further  struggles  were 
useless,  etc.  Now,  I  want  your  proceedings  of  the  next  day,  because  they 
were  the  first  embodiment  of  such  sentiments  by  so  important  a  portion  of 
the  people,  etc. 

I  shall  be  glad  to  get  your  educational  report. 
Yours  very  truly, 

WILLIAM  SMITH. 

This  closes  my  narrative  of  the  events  of  1865.  It  shows  what 
had  been  done  toward  restoration.  The  war  had  ceased,  and  the 
rights  of  person  and  property  were  comparatively  safe.  Anarchy 
had  been  averted.  But  much  still  remained  to  be  done  to  secure  the 
full  measure  of  the  civil  and  political  rights  of  Virginia  as  one  of  the 
members  of  the  Federal  Union.  The  time  for  action  on  this  subject, 
however,  had  not  yet  come.  Prudence  admonished  the  people  to 
wait  patiently,  to  watch  vigilantly  the  development  of  events,  and  to 
seize  promptly  and  boldly  the  first  opportunity  for  action  that  offered 
a  chance  of  success.  All  knew  that  while  a  great  and  good  work 
had  been  done  in  re-establishing  peace  and  social  order,  a  much 
more  important  one — the  restoration  of  Virginia  to  her  rights  in  the 
Union — remained  to  be  accomplished  at  a  later  day. 

The  foregoing  narrative  may  properly  be  regarded  as  the  first 
chapter  in  the  history  of  the  efforts  of  Virginia  to  accomplish  her 
restoration  to  her  position  and  rights  in  the  Union. 


CHAPTER  II. 

I  proceed  now  to  give  a  narrative  of  subsequent  events,  so  far  as  I 
was  an  active  participator  in  or  a  vigilant  observer  of  them.  This 
will  be  more  directly  responsive  to  the  resolution  of  the  Virginia 
Historical  Society,  and  may  be  called  the  second  chapter. 

It  would  be  foreign  to  the  purposes  of  this  paper  to  refer  to  all  the 
important  events  which  marked  the  progress  of  Virginia  from  1865 


16  RESTORATION    OF    VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

to  1868.     They  belong  to  the  general  history  of  the  Commonwealth, 
and  are  as  well  known  to  the  public  as  to  myself. 

It  is  sufficient  for  my  purpose  to  advert  to  a  few  of  them,  which 
have  a  direct  relation  to  the  subject  of  this  narrative. 

In  1865,  after  Peirpoint  had  been  installed  as  Governor  of  Vir- 
ginia, elections  of  members  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Delegates 
of  Virginia  and  of  members  of  the  House  of  Representatives  of  the 
United  States  were  ordered,  with  the  sanction  of  President  Andrew 
Johnson.  At  this  Congressional  election  I  was  chosen  to  represent 
the  district  in  which  I  resided  in  the  House  of  Representatives  of 
the  United  States. 

On  the  day  appointed  for  the  commencement  of  the  session  of 
Congress,  the  Representatives  who  had  been  elected  by  the  Southern 
States,  after  seeing  that  their  certificates  of  election  were  in  due 
form  and  properly  authenticated  and  filed  in  the  office  of  the  clerk 
of  the  House  of  Representatives,  took  their  seats  in  the  hall.  But 
on  the  formal  roll-call,  preliminary  to  the  administration  of  the  oath 
of  office  to  members,  it  was  found  that  the  clerk  had  failed  to  enter 
the  name  of  any  Southern  member  on  it.  By  what  authority  this 
outrage  on  the  constitutional  rights  of  the  Southern  members  was 
perpetrated  I  do  not  know.  That  it  was  in  violation  of  the  Consti- 
tution, is  obvious  from  the  fact  that  the  Constitution  itself  specifically 
enumerates  and  defines  the  requisites  for  eligibility  of  members,  and 
Congress  has  no  constitutional  power  to  add  to  or  take  from,  to 
enlarge  or  curtail,  qualifications  thus  fixed  by  the  Constitution  itself. 
We  were  not  permitted  to  be  heard  in  defence  of  our  rights,  and  by 
this  lawless  device  we  were  quietly  evicted  from  our  seats  !  That 
this  act  was  a  gross  usurpation  of  power,  not  warranted  by  the 
Constitution,  was  at  a  later  day  substantially  admitted  by  leading 
members  of  Congress,  when  they  acknowledged  that  they  had  been 
acting  outside  the  limits  of  the  Constitution  / 

I  refer  to  this  fact  as  one  which  tended  largely  to  retard  the 
growth  of  fraternal  feeling  between  the  Northern  and  Southern 
people  and  to  reopen  the  wounds  of  the  war,  which,  under  the 
soothing  influences  of  time,  had  begun  to  heal. 

It  is  also  necessary  to  state  that  provision  had  been  made  by  the 
military  authorities  of  "District  No.  i"  (as  Virginia  was  then 
called)  for  the  election,  in  October,  1867,  of  members  of  a  conven- 
tion to  frame  a  new  Constitution  for  the  State.  It  was  provided 
that  this  convention  should  assemble  in  Richmond  on  the  3d  of 
December,  1867;  but  there  were  such  stringent  restrictions  imposed 


RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  17 

on  eligibility  of  members  that  much  the  larger  number  of  the  men 
of  intelligence,  education,  and  experience  in  public  affairs  were 
effectually  excluded  from  participation  in  its  deliberations. 

The  convention  was  mainly  composed  of  ignorant  and  excited 
negroes,  led  by  greedy  adventurers  from  the  North,  popularly  known 
as  "  carpet-baggers,"  and  a  few  recreant  natives,  who  were  desig- 
nated "scallawags."  To  this  hideous  majority  were  opposed  a  small 
minority  of  the  better  class  of  citizens,  generally  young  men,  who, 
not  having  held  any  public  office  before  the  war,  were  not  disfran- 
chised by  the  Congressional  iron-clad  test  oath. 

These  young  men  fought  a  good  fight  in  defence  of  the  rights  and 
interests  of  the  people  of  Virginia,  but  found  themselves  powerless 
to  resist  the  torrent  of  malignity  and  radicalism  which  swept  every- 
thing before  it. 

The  convention  remained  in  session  from  3d  December,  1867,  to 
the  24th  April,  1868. 

The  result  of  the  labors  of  such  a  body  of  men  could  readily  be 
anticipated.  It  was  the  formation  and  recommendation  of  a  Consti- 
tution at  war  with  every  principle  of  civil  liberty,  bristling  with  test 
oaths  and  disfranchisements  and  other  enormities,  and  containing 
provisions  artfully  and  insidiously  worded,  so  as  not  only  to  throw 
the  whole  political  power  of  the  State  into  the  hands  of  the  most 
ignorant  classes  of  her  people,  but  to  render  practicable  the  virtual 
confiscation,  by  the  agency  of  corrupt  judges  and  ignorant  and 
prejudiced  and  interested  juries,  of  the  estate  of  every  one  who  had 
ever  been  a  slaveholder !  Under  this  Constitution  it  was  provided 
that  no  man  who  could  not  take  the  Congressional  test  oath  could  be 
allowed  to  vote  at  any  public  election,  or  be  eligible  to  any  public 
office,  or  be  allowed  to  serve  on  any  jury !  Fortunately,  the  act  of 
Congress,  which  allowed  the  convention  to  be  held,  provided  that  the 
Constitution  which  it  might  form  should  be  reported  to  Congress  for 
its  approval  before  it  could  be  submitted  to  popular  vote  for  ratifica- 
tion or  rejection. 

The  publication  of  this  monstrous  document  filled  the  public 
mind  with  horror  and  dismay.  The  only  rational  hope  of  defeating 
its  adoption,  lay  in  an  effort  to  induce  Congress  to  withhold  its 
approval.  But,  as  Virginia  was  then  without  representation  in  Con- 
gress, she  had  no  accredited  agent  whose  duty  and  privilege  it 
would  be  to  expose  its  enormities  and  demand  its  modification  or 
rejection.  Although  this  fact  was  well  known  to  every  man  of  ordi- 
nary intelligence,  when  the  Constitution  was  transmitted  to  Congress 


18  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

for  approval  or  disapproval,  not  a  voice  was  heard  from  Virginia  in 
the  way  of  protest  or  objection.  Everybody  remained  quiescent, 
either  in  the  belief  that  "what  was  everybody's  business  was  no- 
body's business,"  or  in  the  delusive  hope  that  some  Northern  mem- 
ber of  Congress  would  volunteer  to  examine,  critically,  the  volumi- 
nous instrument  and  point  out  the  grounds  of  objection  to  it.  I 
remember  when,  at  a  later  day,  I  was  in  Washington,  I  met  Mr. 
James  Brooks,  of  New  York,  then  a  leading  Conservative  member 
of  the  House  of  Representatives,  and  inquired  of  him  how  it  hap- 
pened that  such  a  monstrous  instrument  could  have  received  the 
approval  of  the  House?  His  reply  was,  that  very  few  members 
knew  anything  about  it.  It  was  reported  to  the  House  by  the 
appropriate  committee  as  the  work  of  a  convention  of  Virginia,  and 
as  no  one  from  Virginia  had  even  suggested  an  objection  to  it,  it 
was  presumed  to  be  satisfactory  to  everybody,  and  passed  as  a 
matter  of  course.  He  closed  by  the  pertinent  inquiry,  "  If  the 
people  of  Virginia  will  not  attend  to  their  own  interests,  how  can 
they  expect  other  people  to  do  so  for  them?" 

I  was  a  vigilant  observer  of  the  progress  of  events  at  Washington, 
and  had  written  to  a  friend  in  Richmond,  urging  him  to  call  on  one 
of  the  organized  political  committees  in  that  city  and  get  them  to 
formulate  a  protest  against  the  approval  of  the  Constitution  by  the 
House  of  Representatives.  His  reply  was,  that  he  had  done  so,  and 
that  the  answer  was  that  the  committees  thought  they  had  no  juris- 
diction over  the  subject,  and  declined  to  take  any  action  in  the 
matter. 

It  thus  happened  that  by  default  of  the  people  of  Virginia,  the  bill 
approving  the  proposed  Constitution  of  Virginia  (popularly  called 
the  Underwood  Constitution)  was  allowed  to  pass  the  House  of 
Representatives,  and  be  sent  to  the  Senate  for  its  concurrence,  with- 
out a  whisper  of  opposition  ! 

Shortly  thereafter,  Congress  passed  a  joint  resolution  for  the  usual 
Christmas  recess,  to  commence  about  the  2ist  of  December,  1868,  and 
to  continue  to  the  4th  of  January,  1869.  This  action  gave  us  a  respite  of 
about  a  fortnight,  as  it  was  hardly  probable  the  Senate  would  act  on  the 
bill  before  the  commencement  of  the  recess.  I  have  not  access  to  the 
journals  of  Congress,  and  therefore  I  cannot  give  with  certainty  the 
dates  of  either  of  these  events. 

It  was  evident  that  unless  some  measure  was  adopted  within  the 
ensuing  fortnight  to  arrest  the  passage  of  the  bill  by  the  Senate,  the 
Underwood  Constitution  would  be  permanently  fastened  on  Virginia. 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  19 

I  had  looked  in  vain  to  the  Richmond  press  for  some  movement  to 
organize  opposition  to  its  passage.  But  apathy  seemed  to  pervade 
the  State,  and  everybody  remained  quiescent.  Thus  the  strange 
spectacle  was  presented  to  the  country  of  a  high-spirited  people, 
who  in  1861  had  promptly  rushed  to  arms  to  encounter  all  the  dan- 
gers and  horrors  of  civil  war,  in  defence  of  their  rights  against  a 
remote  and  contingent  danger,  yet  now,  when  a  disaster  tenfold 
greater  in  degree,  actually  present  and  certain,  was  immediately 
impending,  failed  to  raise  voice  or  arm  to  ward  off  the  unspeakable 
calamity  ! 

I  have  no  doubt  that  hundreds — nay,  thousands — of  my  fellow- 
citizens  thought  and  felt  as  I  did  as  to  the  necessity  of  taking  action 
on  the  subject.  But  no  one  seemed  to  be  willing  to  assume  the 
responsibility  of  taking  the  lead  ! 

Under  these  circumstances,  as  the  necessity  for  moving  in  the 
matter  was  urgent,  and  the  time  within  which  action  likely  to  lead 
to  a  successful  result  was  limited  to  two  weeks,  I  determined  to 
sound  a  note  of  alarm  by  calling  the  attention  of  the  people  of  Vir- 
ginia to  the  frightful  dangers  which  threatened  them,  and  urging 
those  who  thought  as  I  did  to  unite  in  an  organized  attempt  to  avert 
them. 

With  this  object  in  view,  I  wrote  "a  communication,"  over  the 
signature  "Senex,"  intended  for  publication  in  the  Richmond 
Dispatch.  This  paper  was  written  entirely  on  my  own  responsi- 
bility, and  without  conference  or  consultation  with  any  one.  My 
purpose  was  to  try  and  arouse  the  people  to  the  necessity  of  imme- 
diate action,  and  to  suggest  as  the  most  feasible,  if  not  the  only, 
means  of  obtaining  relief  from  the  disfranchisements  and  test  oaths 
embodied  in  the  Underwood  Constitution,  the  tender  to  Congress 
on  behalf  of  Virginia  of  a  compromise,  on  the  basis  of  universal 
suffrage  as  an  equivalent  for  universal  amnesty. 

After  the  close  of  the  Presidential  and  Congressional  elections  of 
November,  1868,  it  became  manifest  to  all  thoughtful  men  that 
universal  suffrage  was  a  foregone  conclusion  in  the  Northern  mind. 
It  was  as  inevitable  as  any  decree  of  fate.  The  Northern  States  had 
the  political  as  well  as  the  physical  power  to  enforce  it.  Nor  had 
they  left  any  doubt  as  to  their  fixed  purpose  to  exercise  that  power, 
for  they  had  incorporated  it  as  a  cardinal  feature  of  the  future  policy 
of  the  Republican  party. 

If,  therefore,  we  could  secure  as  an  equivalent  for  it  relief  from 
the  disfranchisements  and  test  oaths,  which  would  make  slaves  of  us 


20  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

for  a  generation  to  come,  it  would  be  so  much  substantial  gain  for  a 
merely  nominal  concession  ! 

I  knew  full  well,  however,  that  in  the  condition  of  public  opinion 
which  then  existed  in  Virginia,  in  regard  to  granting  the  right  of 
suffrage  to  the  ignorant  negroes,  the  simple  announcement  of  the 
proposed  basis  of  compromise  would  arouse  a  storm  of  fierce  indig- 
nation throughout  the  State,  and  draw  down  on  him  who  had  the 
hardihood  to  suggest  it  a  torrent  of  denunciation  and  obloquy  which 
few  men  have  been  called  on  to  endure  ! 

The  sequel  proved  that  I  was  not  mistaken  in  this  respect.  The 
people  were  not  prepared  to  reason  calmly  on  the  subject.  The 
sacrifice  they  were  required  to  make  was  hateful  to  them.  For  a 
time,  passion  and  prejudice  exercised  unlimited  sway  over  the  popu- 
lar mind,  and  no  inconsiderable  portion  of  the  public  press.  Six 
months  elapsed  before  the  sober  reason  and  common  sense  of  the 
people  enabled  them  to  look  at  the  other  side  of  the  question,  and  to 
comprehend  the  incalculable  advantages  which  they  had  secured  to 
themselves  by  yielding  gracefully  to  what  was  inevitable  ! 

The  article,  "Senex,"   was  in  the  following  words : 

To  the  Editors  of  the  Dispatch  : 

The  present  unhappy  condition  of  Virginia,  and  the  gloomy  pros- 
pects which  seem  to  lie  before  us,  naturally  fill  every  thoughtful  mind  with 
painful  apprehension.  Should  the  Constitution  recommended  by  the  recent 
convention  be  ratified,  or  be  reported  to  Congress  as  ratified  by  the  popu- 
lar vote,  the  condition  of  the  Commonwealth  will  be  simply  intolerable. 
Almost  every  man  worthy  of  public  trust  will  be  disfranchised,  not  only  as 
to  office,  but  in  regard  to  suffrage ;  and  the  political  power  of  the  State  will 
pass  into  the  hands  of  strangers  and  adventurers.  The  property  of  the 
country  will  be  at  the  mercy  of  those  who  pay  little  or  no  portion  of  the 
taxes,  and  we  shall  be  plundered  at  the  will  of  those  who  come  among  us 
to  obtain  office  and  gratify  their  greed  for  spoils. 

It  requires  much  prudence  on  the  part  of  the  people  of  Virginia,  and  the 
sacrifice  of  many  cherished  opinions,  to  avert  these  direful  calamities.  The 
question  is  now  forced  upon  us  to  decide,  not  what  we  would  desire — not 
what  we  are  willing  to  take — but  what  we  shall  be  allowed  to  retain. 

We  have  already  made  many  and  painful  sacrifices.  We  have  sanctioned 
by  our  votes  the  constitutional  amendment  which  abolished  slavery,  and  we 
have  shaped  our  legislation  so  as  to  accord  with  the  provisions  of  that 
amendment. 

These  measures  were  exceedingly  distasteful  to  most  of  our  people, 
and  many  thought  at  the  time  they  would  be  fatal  to  the  prosperity  of  the 
State.  But  in  large  portions  of  the  Commonwealth,  if  not  throughout  its 
whole  extent,  it  has  been  found  that  the  results  have  not  been  so  disastrous 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE   UNION.  21 

as  was  anticipated.  In  some  districts,  in  which  there  was  not  an  over  pro- 
portion of  blacks,  the  change  has  proved  beneficial ;  and  the  writer  of  this 
paper  has  heard  many  who  had  been  slaveholders  say  that  they  would  be 
unwilling  to  restore  slavery  if  it  were  in  their  power  to  do  so.  As  immigra- 
tion flows  into  the  State,  this  opinion  will  become  more  general,  and  when 
our  political  troubles  are  finally  settled,  it  will  prove  to  be  almost  universal. 

But  the  point  to  which  I  now  wish  to  draw  public  attention  is,  what  fur- 
ther sacrifices  of  opinions  and  prejudices  are  necessary  to  render  those 
which  we  have  already  made  productive  of  good  fruit,  and  to  secure  to  our- 
selves and  our  families  exemption  from  the  evils  to  which  I  have  adverted? 
As  matters  now  stand,  we  have  great  reason  to  apprehend  that  the  ballot- 
boxes  will  be  so  manipulated  at  the  coming  election  as  to  fasten  the  pro- 
posed Constitution,  with  all  its  odious  features  of  disfranchisement  and 
burdensome  taxation,  upon  us.  We  are  naturally  led,  then,  to  inquire, 
how  can  this  bitter  cup  be  turned  away  from  our  lips  ? 

There  is  one  point  on  which  Northern  sentiment,  or,  as  the  politicians 
and  the  press  of  the  North  are  pleased  to  call  it,  "the  national  will,"  seems 
to  be  fixed  and  irreversible;  and  that  is,  that  universal  suffrage,  without 
distinction  of  race  or  color,  shall  be  forced  on  us.  They  maintain  that 
negro  suffrage  is  a  legitimate,  "  if  not  a  necessary  sequence  "  of  negro 
emancipation.  Judge  Chase  and  the  more  conservative  Republicans  hold 
this  opinion,  and  urge  us  to  adopt  it  as  the  means  of  avoiding  greater  evils. 
This  proposition  is  exceedingly  unpalatable  to  the  people  of  the  South. 
We  know  that  the  negroes  are  not  qualified  to  exercise  the  elective  fran- 
chise, and  that  they  would  be  unsafe  depositaries  of  political  power.  But 
how  are  we  to  help  ourselves  ?  We  are  powerless  to  resist  by  arms,  and  the 
recent  national  elections  have  shown  that  we  are  equally  powerless  at  the 
ballot-box. 

There  is  an  old  adage  that  "  half  a  loaf  is  better  than  no  bread,"  and  I 
would  respectfully  ask,  is  not  ours  a  case  for  the  application  of  that  propo- 
sition ?  Is  it  not  better  to  surrender  half  than  to  lose  all?  Is  it  not  better 
to  take  universal  suffrage,  with  an  exemption  from  disfranchisement  and 
the  other  evils  to  which  I  have  alluded,  than  to  have  them  all  forced  upon 
us?  After  grievous  travail  of  spirit,  I  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
such  is  the  dictate  of  prudence  and  common  sense. 

The  Southern  mind  is  naturally  sensitive  in  regard  to  everything  like 
negro  equality.  We  cannot  forget  that  they  were  recently  our  slaves,  nor 
can  we  dismiss  from  our  minds  the  conviction  that  they  are  naturally  infe- 
rior to  the  white  race,  and  the  knowledge  that  they  are  uneducated  and 
ignorant  of  the  first  principles  of  government.  Every  step,  therefore,  in 
the  direction  of  that  equality  has  been  taken  reluctantly  and  with  many 
misgivings.  When  it  was  proposed  to  introduce  negroes  as  witnesses,  the 
public  mind  of  Virginia  was  not  prepared  for  the  proposition.  At  first,  their 
admissibility  was  limited  by  law  to  cases  in  which  a  negro  was  a  party. 
Afterwards  the  restriction  was  removed,  and  they  became  lawful,  competent 
witnesses  in  all  cases,  and.  as  far  as  I  have  heard,  no  mischief  has  resulted. 
Their  testimony  is  received  and  weighed  like  that  of  other  men.  But 
competency  does  not  necessarily  imply  credibility.  Their  testimony  is 


22  RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION. 

believed  or  disbelieved  in  proportion  to  the  character  of  the  witness  and 
the  intrinsic  probability  of  his  evidence. 

We  now  look  with  extreme  aversion  on  negro  suffrage.  It  is  natural  we 
should  do  so  for  reasons  already  stated.  But  may  we  not  find  upon  actual 
experiment,  as  in  the  case  of  negro  testimony,  that  it  is  not  such  a  bad  thing 
as  we  have  been  accustomed  to  believe  ? 

The  inherent  inferiority  of  the  race,  and  their  want  of  education  and 
property,  will  necessarily  place  them  in  a  position  of  subordination  to  the 
superior  race.  This  has  been  found  to  be  the  case  in  Mississippi,  Georgia 
and  Louisiana.  Knowledge  is  power.  Property  is  power.  Would  it  not, 
therefore,  be  strange  if  the  superior  intelligence  and  accumulated  property 
of  the  superior  race  should  not  exercise  a  controlling  influence  over  the 
ignorance  and  penury  of  the  inferior?  It  seems  to  me  a  contrary  appre- 
hension must  be  ill-founded,  because  it  is  opposed  to  reason  and  human 
experience. 

Will  it  not,  therefore,  be  wise  for  the  people  of  Virginia  to  make  up  their 
minds  to  come  up  at  once  to  the  proposition  of  Judge  Chase  and  the  New 
York  Tribune—"  Universal  suffrage  and  universal  amnesty  "  ?  Better  that 
than  "  universal  suffrage  and  universal  disfranchisement." 

Matters  may  not  work  altogether  smoothly  for  a  time.  We  may  have 
some  trouble  in  portions  of  the  State,  but  it  will  be  temporary.  The  influx 
of  whites  from  abroad,  and  the  efflux  of  blacks  from  the  State,  will  soon 
establish  Caucasian  preponderance  on  a  firm  basis. 

What  we  want  is  peace.  We  want  these  troublesome  questions  settled, 
so  that  the  tide  of  immigration  may  flow  into  Virginia.  As  long  as  we  are 
in  our  present  abnormal  condition  immigrants  will  not  come  among  us, 
because  they  do  not  know  what  to  expect  in  the  future.  Let  these  ques- 
tions be  settled — it  matters  not  how — and  population  and  capital  will  flow 
in  an  unbroken  stream  into  all  parts  of  our  State,  building  up  our  cities, 
opening  our  mines,  buying  and  improving  our  land,  constructing  new  rail- 
ways and  canals,  and  giving  vigor  and  activity  to  our  industrial  interests. 

Thousands  are  now  anxiously  awaiting  this  settlement.  Let  us  throw  no 
farther  obstacles  in  the  way.  Let  us  say  to  the  conservative  Republicans, 
we  accede  to  your  proposition.  Let  us  respond  to  General  Grant's  demand 
for  peace.  When  peace  is  restored,  and  the  Southern  States  are  again 
represented  in  Congress  by  men  who  will  truly  reflect  their  sentiments,  we 
can  have  a  word  to  say  in  regard  to  the  future  policy  of  the  country.  It 
seems  to  me  obvious  that  by  this  course  we  must  gain  something,  and  can- 
not lose  anything. 

And  now  for  the  mode  of  carrying  these  ideas  into  practical  effect.  This 
is  a  subject  by  no  means  free  from  difficulty,  and  the  time  for  action  is  short. 
We  cannot  get  up  another  convention  to  form  a  new  Constitution.  But  a 
Constitution  derives  its  validity,  not  from  the  body  which  frames  and 
proposes  it,  but  from  its  ratification  by  the  votes  of  the  people.  If  the 
Legislature  of  a  State  were  to  instruct  the  Court  of  Appeals,  instead  of  a 
convention,  to  frame  a  Constitution  to  be  voted  on  by  the  people,  it  would 
be  competent  for  them  to  do  so ;  and  such  a  Constitution,  if  ratified  by  the 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  23 

popular  vote,  would  be  just  as  valid  and  obligatory  as  if  the  same  had  been 
framed  by  a  convention  assembled  in  the  usual  form. 

To  avoid  unnecessary  delay,  let  the  Executive  Committee,  in  the  interval 
between  the  present  time  and  the  ist  of  February,  take  the  Constitution  of 
1850  and  the  proposed  Constitution  of  1861,  and  from  the  two  select  the 
better  provisions,  omitting  the  word  "white"  and  all  other  provisions  that 
would  be  in  conflict  with  "universal  suffrage  and  universal  amnesty,"  and 
thus  frame  a  complete  Constitution. 

Let  us,  then,  avail  ourselves  of  this  idea.  Let  the  Central  Conservative 
Committee  call  together,  say  two  gentlemen  of  approved  wisdom  and 
integrity  from  each  Congressional  district,  to  meet  that  committee  in  Rich- 
mond about  the  first  of  February,  to  agree  upon  a  Constitution  for  Virginia, 
to  be  submitted  to  Congress  as  a  substitute  for  that  recommended  by  the 
late  convention.  Let  this  Constitution  embody  the  universal  suffrage  and 
universal  amnesty  proposition  in  its  broadest  terms,  and  negro  eligibility  to 
boot! 

On  the  ist  of  February  the  Executive  Committee  and  their  adjunct 
advisers  could  come  together,  and,  by  limiting  discussion  to  five  minutes 
on  each  proposition,  they  could  revise  the  work  of  the  committee  and 
perfect  a  Constitution  in  three  or  four  days  to  be  presented  to  Congress 
as  a  substitute  for  the  Constitution  which  has  already  elicited  such  strong 
censure  from  the  New  York  Times  and  other  Northern  papers. 

May  I  ask,  Mr.  Editor,  that  you  will  give  this  proposition  your  calm 
consideration,  and,  if  you  approve,  that  you  will  extend  to  it  the  support  of 
your  vigorous  pen  and  invoke  the  aid  of  the  press  of  the  State  ? 

It  seems  to  me  that  this  will  be  the  easiest  and  the  shortest  way  of  getting 
out  of  our  present  unhappy  difficulties. 

SENEX. 

This  article,  "  Senex,"  was  written  on  the  evening  of  igth  Decem- 
ber, 1868,  and  was  not  finished  until  n  o'clock  at  night.  As  the 
mail  left  Staunton  for  Richmond  at  a  very  early  hour  next  morning, 
I  apprehended  some  difficulty  in  having  it  mailed  in  time  for  the  first 
train.  Being  anxious  to  have  it  published  as  promptly  as  practicable, 
so  as  to  afford  as  much  time  as  possible  to  the  people  to  consider  a 
question  of  so  much  gravity  and  importance,  I  enclosed  it 'in  an 
unsealed  envelope,  directed  to  "The  Editors  of  the  Dispatch,"  and 
at  sunrise  next  morning  carried  it  to  the  railroad  station,  intending 
to  mail  it  on  the  train,  unless  I  could  find  some  person  going  to 
Richmond,  to  whom  I  could  safely  entrust  it  for  delivery  to  the 
Dispatch,  with  an  earnest  request  for  its  publication. 

Fortunately,  I  found  my  friend  General  John  Echols  on  the  plat- 
form, about  to  take  the  train  for  Richmond.  I  then  explained  to 
him  the  object  of  my  early  visit,  and  delivered  to  him  the  envelope, 
telling  him  that  it  contained  "  a  communication  "  to  the  Dispatch  on 


24  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

a  subject  of  a  momentous  character,  which  I  wished  to  have  pub- 
lished as  promptly  as  possible.  I  added  that  I  did  not  know  what 
he  might  think  of  it,  but  that  I  hoped  he  would  approve  it,  and  at 
the  proper  time  would  unite  with  me  in  carrying  it  into  effect.  I 
begged  him,  when  he  took  his  seat  on  the  cars,  to  read  it  carefully 
and  give  me  his  aid  in  securing  its  prompt  publication,  which  he 
promised  to  do.  My  hope  was  that  it  would  be  published  in  the 
Dispatch  of  Tuesday,  the  2ist  of  December,  1868,  or  in  any  event 
on  Wednesday,  22d.  I  also  said  to  General  Echols  that  if  any 
enquiry  were  made  why  I  did  not  attach  my  own  name  to  it,  and 
thereby  assume  the  responsibility  of  its  authorship,  I  authorized  him 
to  say,  on  my  behalf,  that  I  was  restrained  from  doing  so  solely  by 
the  consideration  that  I  feared  some  persons  might  think  me  guilty 
of  vanity  in  assuming  that  my  name  would  add  anything  to  the 
intrinsic  weight  of  the  sentiments  expressed  in  the  communication. 
But,  if  the  editors  desired  to  indicate  who  was  the  responsible  author 
of  it,  they  were  at  liberty  to  refer  to  me  in  any  way  thev  might  think 
proper  as  bearing  that  relation  to  it.  The  General  then  took  his 
departure  on  the  train,  carrying  the  paper  with  him. 

The  communication  not  having  appeared  in  the  Dispatch  of  Tues- 
day or  Wednesday,  I  naturally  inferred  that  there  was  an  unwillingness 
on  the  part  of  the  editors  to  publish  it  at  all. 

General  Echols  returned  to  Staunton  by  the  night  train  of  Wed- 
nesday, the  23d.  When  I  met  him  next  morning  he  informed  me 
that  he  had  read  my  "communication"  with  much  interest,  and, 
cordially  approving  it,  he  had  taken  the  liberty  of  reading  it  to  seve- 
ral friends  whom  he  met  on  the  train,  who  also  approved  it.  When 
he  arrived  at  the  Exchange  Hotel,  he  was  gratified  to  find  that 
Colonel  W.  T.  Sutherlin,  of  Danville,  was  one  of  the  guests.  Having 
confidence  in  his  good  sense  and  sound  judgment,  he  sought  an 
early  opportunity  to  read  to  him  my  paper  and  invite  his  co-opera- 
tion in  the  movement  proposed,  which  Colonel  Sutherlin  promptly 
promised  to  give.  The  paper  was  then  taken  by  General  Echols  to 
the  editors  of  the  Dispatch,  who,  after  reading  it,  made  some  objec- 
tion to  publishing  it  in  their  paper,  on  the  ground  that  public  opinion 
was  not  prepared  to  entertain  the  propositions  contained  in  it,  and 
asked  why  I  had  not  signed  my  name  to  it?  In  reply  to  this  inquiry, 
General  Echols  stated  the  reasons  which  had  restrained  me  from 
signing  it,  but  informed  him  that  I  was  willing  that  the  editors 
should  refer  to  me  as  the  author  of  the  communication  and  responsi- 
ble for  its  contents. 


RESTORATION    OF    VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION.  25 

To  this  proposition  no  definite  answer  was  given,  and  the  objec- 
tions of  the  editor  did  not  seem  to  be  removed  by  it.  Being  thus 
discouraged,  General  Echols  took  the  communication  to  the  office  of 
the  Whig  for  publication,  but  was  met  with  similar  objections  to 
those  made  at  the  office  of  the  Dispatch,  and  a  like  answer  was  given 
to  the  enquiry,  why  I  had  not  signed  my  name  to  the  paper.  The 
result  was  a  polite  refusal  to  publish  it.  It  was  then  submitted  to  the 
editor  of  the  Enquirer,  who  at  once,  and  emphatically,  declined  to 
publish  it  under  any  circumstances.  On  his  return  to  the  hotel, 
General  Echols  reported  the  result  of  his  mission  to  Colonel  Suther- 
lin,  who  readily  volunteered  to  go  with  him,  after  supper,  to  see  Mr. 
Alexander  Mosely,  then  editor  of  the  Whig,  at  his  private  residence 
and  try  to  overcome  his  objections  to  publishing  the  communication. 
They  accordingly  went  to  Mr.  Mosely 's,  and  had  an  interview  with 
him,  in  which,  after  some  discussion,  it  was  finally  agreed  that  Mr. 
Mosely  would  publish  it  in  the  Whig  on  three  conditions :  ist,  that  I 
should  be  referred  to  as  the  author ;  2d,  that  the  editor  should  not  be 
held  committed  to  support  the  propositions  contained  inthe  paper  ; 
and  3d,  that  the  Dispatch  should  agree  to  publish  it  simultaneously 
under  like  conditions.* 

The  Dispatch  having  consented  to  this  arrangement,  the  publication 
was  made  in  both  papers  on  the  25th  of  December,  1868,  indicating 
me,  unmistakably,  as  the  author. 

After  my  communication  had  been  sent  to  Richmond,  as  above 
stated,  and  while  the  publication  of  it  was  in  suspense,  I  held  confer- 
ences with  several  leading  citizens  of  Staunton,  informing  them  of  the 
contents  of  the  paper  I  had  written,  and  urging  them  to  unite  with  me 
in  organizing  opposition  to  the  passage  by  the  Senate  of  the  bill 
which  had  been  sent  to  it  by  the  House  of  Representatives. 

Among  the  most  prominent  were  Thomas  J.  Michie,  Esq.,  Judge 
H.  W.  Sheffey,  Nicholas  K.  Trout,  Esq.,  Major  H.  M.  Bell,  R.  H.  Cat- 
let,  and  others.  Colonel  John  B.  Baldwin,  who  always  took  an  active 
part  in  all  matters  affecting  public  affairs,  was  at  that  time  in  Washing- 
ton attending  to  professional  business  in  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States,  and  therefore  I  could  not  consult  with  him. 


*The  foregoing  statements  as  to  the  publication  of  the  article,  "  Senex,"  was 
submitted  to  General  John  Echols,  who  writes,  loth  December,  1887,  to  the 
author:  "  I  think  that  you  have  stated,  at  least  with  substantial  accuracy, 
the  manner  in  which  the  article,  'Senex,'  came  to  be  published,  and  the 
connection  which  I,  as  your  friend  and  agent,  had  therewith." 


26  RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

On  Friday,  the  25th  of  December,  1868,  these  gentlemen  met  by 
appointment  at  my  office  in  Staunton,  for  the  purpose  of  considering 
the  best  means  of  promoting  the  object  we  had  in  view.  General 
Echols  and  Colonel  John  B.  Baldwin  (who  had  meanwhile  returned 
to  Staunton)  were  also  present  at  that  meeting.  The  whole  subject 
was  fully  discussed  and  considered  in  all  its  bearings,  and  all  con- 
curred in  the  necessity  of  securing  the  co-operation  of  gentlemen  of 
intelligence  and  weight  of  character  in  all  parts  of  the  State.  All 
felt  that  the  necessity  for  action  was  urgent,  as  the  time  for  taking  it 
(little  more  than  a  fortnight)  was  very  limited.  We  therefore  agreed 
forthwith  to  issue  invitations  to  prominent  gentlemen  in  all  parts  of 
the  State  to  meet  us  in  Richmond  on  3131  of  December,  1868,  to 
confer  and  decide  what  measures  should  be  adopted  to  rescue  the 
State  from  the  dangers  which  threatened  her.  The  form  of  the 
invitation  was  then  prepared,  and  the  names  of  all  the  gentlemen 
present  were  attached  to  it,  with  the  exception  of  that  of  Judge  Sheffeyi 
which  (though  he  was  in  full  accord  with  us  and  willing  to  sign  it), 
we  thought  had  better  be  omitted,  as  he  then  occupied  the  position  of 
judge  of  our  Circuit  Court.  The  paper  was,  without  delay,  sent  to 
the  office  of  the  Spectator  to  be  printed.  In  a  short  time  the  work 
was  executed,  and  more  than  a  hundred  copies  were  returned  to  us. 
These  were  promptly  placed  in  envelopes,  directed  and  mailed  to 
leading  men,  who  we  thought  would  probably  be  disposed  to  co-ope- 
rate with  us. 

On  the  3Oth  of  December,  Mr.  T.  J.  Michie,  General  Echols,  Major 
H.  M.  Bell,  N.  K.  Trout,  and  myself,  went  to  Richmond  to  attend 
the  meeting.  Colonel  J.  B.  Baldwin  did  not  accompany  us,  partly,  as 
I  believed,  from  the  urgency  of  professional  business  which  had 
accumulated  in  his  office  during  his  absence  at  Washington,  and 
partly  because  of  doubts  which  had  arisen  in  his  mind  whether  public 
opinion  was  prepared  to  entertain  so  bold  a  proposition. 

We  were  met  in  Richmond  by  a  number  of  the  gentlemen  who 
had  been  invited  to  join  us  in  conference,  and  by  a  number  of  others 
to  whom  formal  invitations  had  not  been  sent,  but  who  had  heard  of 
and  sympathized  with  the  objects  of  the  meeting,  and  others  who 
were  attracted  by  curiosity  to  know  what  we  proposed  to  do.  The 
whole  subject,  in  all  its  aspects,  was  the  subject  of  earnest  conversa- 
tion in  the  halls  and  public  rooms  of  the  hotel  during  the  evening  of 
our  arrival  and  the  forenoon  of  the  following  day. 

Colonel  Carrington,  the  proprietor  of  the  Exchange  Hotel,  having 
kindly  tendered  us  the  use  of  a  large  room  in  his  hotel,  known  as  the 


RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  27 

"Concert  Hall,"  for  our  meetings,  we  assembled  in  it  at  noon  on  3ist 
of  December,  1868.  An  organization  was  effected  by  calling  me  to 
the  chair,  and  the  appointment  of  Mr.  C.  C.  McRae,  of  Chesterfield, 
as  secretary. 

I  do  not  deem  it  necessary  to  say  anything  in  regard  to  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  meeting.  A  full  and  accurate  record  was  kept  of  them 
at  the  time  by  the  secretary,  and  was  incorporated  in  his  journal, 
which  he  sent  to  me,  and  is  in  my  possession,  and  which  is  herewith 
presented  as  part  of  this  narrative. 

The  following  is  a  copy  of  it: 

A  meeting  of  citizens  from  different  portions  of  the  State  of  Virginia, 
convened  at  the  Exchange  Hotel,  in  the  city  of  Richmond,  on  the  3ist  day 
of  December,  1868,  for  the  purpose  of  consultation  in  regard  to  matters 
explained  in  the  narrative  of  their  proceedings  hereinafter  supplied,  was 
organized  by  inviting  the  Hon.  A.  H.  H.  Stuart  to  the  chair,  and  by  the 
appointment  of  C.  C.  McRae  as  secretary. 

Mr.  Stuart,  on  taking  the  chair,  explained  the  objects  for  which  the  meet- 
ing was  held,  ancl  the  circumstances  under  and  the  manner  in  which  it 
originated. 

After  considerable  discussion,  in  which  a  large  number  of  the  meeting 
participated,  and  in  which  much  harmony  of  feeling  and  views  was  dis- 
played, it  was  determined  that  a  committee  of  eight  in  number  (of  which 
the  Hon.  A.  H.  H.  Stuart  was  made  chairman  by  the  meeting)  should  be 
appointed,  charged  with  the  duty  of  deliberating  and  reporting  in  regard 
to  suitable  business  for  the  consideration  of  the  meeting. 

The  Chair  being  requested  to  appoint  the  remaining  members  of  the 
committee,  accordingly  named  Messrs.  George  W.  Boiling,  of  Petersburg ; 
Thomas  S.  Flournoy,  of  Halifax;  John  L.  Marye,  Jr.,  of  Fredericksburg ; 
D.  C.  Dejarnette,  of  Caroline;  Frank  G.  Ruffin,  of  Chesterfield;  B.  H. 
McGruder,  of  Albemarle;  and  James  Johnston,  of  Bedford. 

Whereupon,  the  meeting  adjourned  to  convene  on  the  ensuing  evening  at 
the  same  place. 

According  to  the  order  of  adjournment,  the  meeting  again  assem- 
bled on  January  ist,  1869,  when  the  committee  appointed  at  the  former 
session,  through  its  chairman,  submitted  a  report ;  the  distinct  features  of 
which,  being  separately  considered  and  acted  on  as  a  whole,  after  elaborate 
discussion  was  finally  approved,  with  some  modifications  introduced  by  the 
action  of  the  meeting  by  a  vote  nearly  unanimous,  only  two  gentlemen  who 
participated  in  the  meeting  expressing  unwillingness  to  concur  in  its  final 
action.  The  names  of  several  other  gentlemen,  who  acted  with  the  meet- 
ing, would  doubtless  have  been  added  had  they  been  present  at  the  time  of 
adjournment. 

In  the  progress  of  the  meeting,  the  following  proceedings  occurred :  It 
was  resolved  that  the  Hon.  Alexander  H.  H.  Stuart  be  requested  to  serve 
as  chairman  of  the  committee  of  nine  persons  to  be  appointed  to  visit 


28  RESTORATION   OF  VIRGINIA  TO   THE   UNION. 

Washington  for  the  purpose  indicated  in  another  part  of  the  proceedings, 
and  that  the  Chair  be  requested  to  appoint  a  committee  of  three,  to  recom- 
mend for  the  consideration  of  the  meeting  the  names  of  eight  other  gentle- 
men who,  with  the  chairman,  shall  constitute  the  delegation  referred  to. 

In  accordance  with  the  foregoing  resolution,  the  Chair  named  Messrs. 
John  Echols,  F.  G.  Ruffin  and  James  D.  Johnston  as  the  committee;  who, 
after  short  retirement,  reported,  recommending  as  the  delegation,  in  addition 
to  the  Hon.  A.  H.  H.  Stuart  as  chairman,  Messrs.  John  L.  Marye,  Jr.,  of  Fred- 
ericksburg;  James  F.  Johnston,  of  Bedford;  W.  T.  Sutherlin,  of  Danville; 
Wyndham  Robertson,  of  Washington  county;  W.  L.  Owen,  of  Halifax; 
John  B.  Baldwin,  of  Augusta;  James  Neeson,  of  Richmond,  and  J.  F. 
Slaughter,  of  Lynchburg. 

The  question  being  put  on  the  recommendation  of  the  committee,  the 
same  was  unanimously  approved. 

It  was  resolved  that  the  press  of  the  city  of  Richmond  be  requested  to 
publish  these  proceedings  ;  and,  on  motion,  the  meeting  adjourned. 

C.  C.  McRAE,  Secretary. 

The  following  is  the  report  of  the  committee  referred  to,  as  modi- 
fied by  the  meeting,  with  signatures  thereto  : 

The  undersigned,  residents  of  different  parts  of  Virginia,  having,  upon 
invitation  of  some  of  their  own  number,  assembled  in  Richmond  for  the 
purpose  of  holding  a  conference  in  regard  to  the  present  imperilled  condition 
of  the  Commonwealth,  after  a  full  interchange  of  opinions,  have  come  to  the 
following  conclusions,  which  they  respectfully  submit  to  the  calm  and  patriotic 
judgment  of  their  countrymen  : 

1.  While  the  convictions  of  the  undersigned  and,  as  they  believe,  of  the 
people  of  Virginia  generally  remain  unchanged,  that  the  freedmen  of  the 
Southern  States,  in  their  present  uneducated  condition,  are  not  prepared  for 
the  intelligent  exercise  of  the  elective  franchise  and  the  performance  of 
other  duties  connected  with  public  affairs,  and  are,  therefore,  at  this  time, 
unsafe  depositaries  of  political  power.    Yet,  in  view  of  the  verdict  of  public 
opinion  in  favor  of  their  being  allowed  to  exercise  the  right  of  suffrage  as 
expressed  in  the  recent  elections,  the  undersigned  are  prepared,  and  they 
believe  the  majority  of  the  people  of  Virginia  are  prepared,  to  surrender 
their  opposition  to  its  incorporation  into  their  fundamental  law  as  an  offering 
on  the  altar  of  peace,  and  in  the  hope  that  union  and  harmony  may  be 
restored  on  the  basis  of  universal  suffrage  and  universal  amnesty. 

2.  To  give  effect  to  this  purpose,  and  to  spare  no  effort  to  effect  a  speedy 
and  permanent  restoration  of  union  and  harmonious  relations  between  the 
portions  of  our  country  which  have  for  some  years  past  been  alienated,  the 
undersigned  will  appoint  a  Committee  of  Nine  from  different  parts  of  the 
State,  and  reflecting,  as  far  as  may  be  practicable,  the  public  sentiment  of 
the  State,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  at  an  early  day  to  proceed  to  Washington 
and  be  authorized  to  make  known  the  views  and  purposes  hereby  declared 
to  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  and  to  take  such  other  measures  as 
they  may  think  proper  to  aid  in  obtaining  from  that  body  such  legislation 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA    TO    THE    UNION. 


29 


concerning  the  organic  law  of  Virginia  as  Congress,  in  its  wisdom,  may 
deem  expedient  and  best  under  all  the  circumstances.  The  delegation  so 
to  be  constituted  may  fill  vacancies,  and  are  authorized  to  enlarge  their 
number  in  their  discretion. 

3.  The  undersigned  recommend  to  the  people  of  Virginia,  by  primary  meet- 
ings, to  appoint  delegates  to  a  popular  convention,  to  be  held  in  Richmond 
on  Wednesday,  the  loth  day  of  February,  1869,  to  receive  the  report  of  the 
committee  appointed  by  this  meeting,  and  to  adopt  such  other  measures  as 
may  be  deemed  most  expedient  to  promote  the  objects  herein  indicated. 


[Signed] 


ALEX.  H.  H.  STUART,  Augusta. 
THOMAS  BRANCH,  Richmond. 
D.  C.  DE]ARNETTE,  Caroline. 
THOMAS  S.  FLOURNOY,  Halifax. 
WYNDHAM  ROBERTSON,  Washington. 
W.  D.  QUESENBERRY,  Caroline. 
B.  H.  MAGRUDER,  Albemarle. 
GEORGE  W.  BOLLING.  Petersburg. 
ASA  D.  DICKINSON,  Prince  Edward. 
JOHN  L.  MARYE,  JR.,  Fredericksburg. 
W.  C.  KNIGHT,  Richmond. 
Ro.  WHITEHEAD,  Nelson. 
J.  F.  SLAUGHTER,  Lynchburg. 
A.  G.  PENDLETON,  Giles. 

A  correct  copy, 


J.  D.  JOHNSTON,  Giles. 
N.  K.  TROUT,  Staunton. 
H.  M.  BELL,  Staunton. 
JOHN  ECHOLS,  Staunton. 
MATTHEW  HARRISON,  Loudoun. 
FRANK  G.  RUFFIN,  Chesterfield. 
C.  C.  McRAE,  Chesterfield. 
R.  L.  WALKER,  Chesterfield. 
W.  T.  SUTHERLIN,  Danville. 
J.  L.  CARRINGTON,  Richmond. 
W.  E.  CAMERON,  Petersburg. 
J.  F.JOHNSON.  Liberty. 
THOMAS  J.  MICHIE,  Staunton. 
JAMES  NEESON,  Richmond. 

C.  C.  McRAE,  Secretary. 


After  the  adjournment  of  the  meeting  on  the  ist  January,  1869, 
most  of  the  members  attended  the  public  reception  given  by  General 
Stoneman,  the  Federal  general  then  in  command  in  Richmond.  He 
received  them  courteously,  expressed  sympathy  with  the  objects  of 
their  meeting  and  hoped  that  it  might  prove  successful. 

Before  leaving  Richmond,  I  issued  a  summons  to  my  associates  on 
the  "  Committee  of  Nine  "  to  assemble  in  Washington  on  the  evening 
of  the  8th  January,  1869. 

On  the  2d  of  January,  1869,  I  returned  to  my  home  in  Staunton. 
Within  an  hour  or  two  after  my  arrival,  Colonel  Baldwin  sent  his  ser- 
vant to  me  with  a  request  that  I  would  let  him  know  what  we  had 
done  at  the  meeting  in  Richmond.  As  I  was  fatigued  by  my  journey 
and,  therefore,  indisposed  to  write  an  account  of  our  proceedings,  I 
drew  from  my  pocket  a  rough  draft  of  the  report  of  the  committee 
of  eight,  of  which  I  was  chairman,  and  which,  with  a  few  immaterial 
alterations,  had  been  adopted  by  the  meeting,  and  handed  it  to  the 
servant,  with  instructions  to  deliver  it  to  Colonel  Baldwin  and  say  to 


30  RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

him  that  it  contained  the  substance  of  our  action,  and  added  that  I 
would  be  obliged  if  Colonel  Baldwin  would  return  it  to  me  as  it  was 
the  only  copy  I  had. 

In  a  few  hours  the  servant  returned  with  the  paper,  and  wrapped 
around  it  was  the  following  note,  written^  in  pencil  by  the  Colonel 
himself  in  his  own  familiar  handwriting,  and  the  original  of  which  is 
filed  with  this  narrative  : 

Dear  Stuart: 

I  apprehend,  from  all  I  can  learn  from  Bell,  Trout  and  Echols,  that 
you  found  rather  a  slim  showing  of  sympathy  at  Richmond,  and  I  shall  not 
be  surprised  if  you  find  the  movement  entirely  tabooed  before  many  days. 

Our  people  seem  to  be  in  pretty  much  the  same  condition  they  were  just 
before  the  fall  of  the  Confederacy.  Everybody  looked  for  it  and  believed  it 
was  coming,  and  yet  if  any  one  dared  to  utter  his  thoughts  he  was  set  upon 
and  cuffed  without  mercy. 

Our  people  now  do  not  seem  to  be  prepared  to  discuss,  or  even  to  con- 
sider, any  plan  of  dealing  with  the  awful  danger  which  threatens  them,  and 
I  very  much  fear  they  will  be  caught  as  the  people  of  old  were  by  the 
deluge. 

I  am  afraid  of  General  Stoneman.  They  say  he  has  no  instructions  from 
Washington,  and  yet  he  goes  on  to  kick  and  cuff  our  people  as  if  he  were  a 
very  radical,  aiming  at  political  objects.  Truly  we  are  fallen  on  evil  timesi 
and  I  fear  worse  are  coming.  Yours  truly, 

JOHN  B.  BALDWIN. 

Sat.  night. 

I  have  thought  proper  to  publish  this  letter,  not  only  to  vindicate 
the  truth  of  history  but  to  do  justice  to  the  memory  of  Colonel  Bald- 
win. We  were  closely  connected  by  the  triple  bond  of  blood,  mar- 
riage and  intimate  personal  friendship.  His  grandmother  and  my 
mother  were  sisters.  His  eldest  sister  was  my  wife.  I  had 
known  him  from  his  infancy,  and  when  he  commenced  the  practice  of 
law,  I  invited  him  to  become  my  partner  in  business,  a  relationship 
which  continued  for  several  years,  and  was  terminated  by  mutual  con- 
sent when  he  had  attained  eminence  at  the  bar  and  we  thought  the 
interests  of  both  would  be  promoted  by  a  dissolution.  We  were  in 
the  habit  of  conferring  and  interchanging  opinions  on  almost  every 
public  question  that  arose,  and  were  generally  in  accord.  Hence,  we 
rarely  failed  to  act  in  concert.  He  was  one  of  the  purest  and  most 
intellectual  and  bravest  men,  both  physically  and  morally,  I  ever  knew. 
If  he  had  been  at  home  when  I  wrote  the  article,  "  Senex,"  I  have  no 
doubt  I  would  have  conferred  with  him  on  the  subject.  But  he  was, 
as  has  already  been  stated,  absent  in  Washington  on  professional 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE   UNION.  31 

business,  and  the  date  of  his  return  was  uncertain.  I,  therefore, 
wrote  the  article,  "  Senex,"  in  his  absence  and  without  his  knowledge. 
When  he  returned  home,  I  was  the  first  to  make  known  to  him  what 
I  had  done,  but  as  the  newspapers  containing  "  Senex  "  had  not  then 
been  published  he  had  had  no  opportunity  of  reading  it.  He  con- 
curred, generally,  in  the  opinion  that  it  was  absolutely  necessary  to 
take  some  measures  to  arrest  the  passage  by  the  Senate  of  the  bill 
which  had  been  passed  by  the  House  of  Representatives,  and,  there- 
fore, readily  consented  to  attend  the  conference  at  my  office  on  the 
morning  of  the  25th  of  December,  and  united  in  the  invitation  to 
other  gentlemen  to  meet  in  Richmond  on  the  3ist  for  consultation. 
But  he  was  in  nowise  committed  to  any  specific  measures  of  policy. 

On  mature  consideration,  but  after  some  hesitation,  Colonel  Bald- 
win finally  decided  to  accept  the  position  of  member  of  "the  Com- 
mittee of  Nine,"  to  which  he  had  been  elected  by  the  Richmond 
meeting.  Having  thus  for  the  first  time  identified  himself  with  the 
movement,  he  took  hold  of  it  with  the  grasp  of  a  giant.  He 
promptly  made  himself  master  of  all  the  facts  bearing  on  the  various 
questions  which  were  likely  to  come  up  for  discussion  before  the 
Congressional  committees.  I  venture  to  say  that  no  member  of  the 
committee  was  so  thoroughly  equipped  as  he  for  the  debates  which 
were  anticipated. 

He  was  then  in  the  prime  of  vigorous  manhood,  having  just  com- 
pleted his  forty-eighth  year.  He  possessed  a  broad,  luminous  and 
well-cultivated  intellect — powers  of  perception  which,  at  times,  vied 
in  speed  and  brilliancy  of  action  with  flashes  of  electricity;  a  sound 
and  clear  judgment;  masculine  common  sense,  enlivened  by  ready 
and  sparkling  wit;  an  ample  command  of  language;  a  wonderful 
power  of  elucidation  by  comparisons,  which,  though  sometimes 
quaint  and  homely,  were  always  apt  and  instructive.  He  was  also 
thoroughly  versed  in  the  principles  of  constitutional  law  and  popular 
rights. 

Nature  had  been  equally  lavish  to  him  in  her  physical  gifts — of  a 
large,  well-proportioned  and  robust  frame,  and  a  massive  head  and 
spacious  brow,  on  the  scale  of  Daniel  Webster's.  His  features  were 
well-formed  and  expressive  of  every  emotion.  His  voice,  while  not 
always  melodious,  was  clear,  distinct  and  penetrating,  and  thus  could 
be  heard  by  an  audience  of  many  thousands.  His  gesture,  though 
not  specially  graceful  and  flowing,  was,  under  all  circumstances, 
striking  and  effective,  and  his  elocution  and  intonations  peculiarly 


32  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

adapted  to  make  the  desired  impression  on  the  crowds  who  thronged 
to  hear  him. 

Knowing  as  I  did  that  Colonel  Baldwin  possessed  these  great 
powers,  I  should  have  regarded  myself  as  singularly  neglectful  of 
my  duties  as  chairman  of  the  Committee  of  Nine  if  I  had  failed 
to  make  them  available  in  defence  of  the  rights  and  interests  of 
Virginia. 

As  chairman  of  the  committee,  it  was  my  official  duty  to  open  the 
conferences  with  the  Senate  and  House  committees  at  Washington, 
by  brief  statements  of  the  objects  of  our  mission,  and  explanations 
of  the  features  of  the  Underwood  Constitution  to  which  we  objected, 
accompanied  by  some  general  remarks  intended  to  present  the  mat- 
ters in  issue,  and  thus  open  the  way  for  more  full  and  thorough 
discussion.  Having  done  this,  it  was  my  habit  to  ask  leave  to 
introduce  Colonel  Baldwin  to  present  our  views  more  at  large.  In 
the  propriety  of  this  course  I  am  sure  I  was  sustained  by  the  unani- 
mous judgment  of  the  committee. 

In  this  way  a  most  important  and  responsible  duty  was  confided  to 
Colonel  Baldwin,  and  I  am  sure  every  surviving  member  of  the  com- 
mittee will  bear  willing  testimony  to  the  zeal,  fidelity  and  ability  with 
which  he  discharged  it.  He  was  also  the  author  of  a  very  strong 
paper,  prepared  at  the  request  of  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the 
Senate,  setting  forth  specifically  and  in  detail  the  modifications  of  the 
Underwood  Constitution  which  we  wished  to  have  made.  This  paper 
(which  will  be  presently  given)  was  signed  by  every  member  of  the 
committee  and  placed  in  the  hands  of  the  Senate  committee.  In  this 
way,  Colonel  Baldwin  unquestionably  became  the  most  conspicuous 
member  of  the  committee. 

Begging  pardon  for  this  digression,  which  seemed  to  be  necessary 
to  correct  misstatements  which  have  been  widely  circulated,  I  resume 
the  thread  of  my  narrative. 

In  the  interval  between  the  adjournment  of  the  Richmond  meeting, 
on  the  ist  of  January,  1869,  and  the  assemblage  of  the  "  Committee 
of  Nine  "  in  Washington  on  the  8th  of  the  same  month,  I  took  several 
steps  intended  to  promote  the  success  of  our  mission.  The  first  of 
these  was  to  address  a  letter  to  Hon.  Horace  Greeley,  editor  of  New 
York  Tribune,  with  whom  I  had,  many  years  before,  a  pleasant  per- 
sonal acquaintance,  informing  him  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Rich- 
mond meeting,  and  of  the  appointment  of  the  "  Committee  of  Nine  " 
to  go  to  Washington  and  endeavor  to  secure  a  compromise  of  all  our 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  33 

difficulties  on  the  basis  of  "  universal  suffrage  and  universal  amnesty," 
and  asking  him,  if  possible,  to  come  to  Washington  and  give  us  his 
assistance  in  accomplishing  it.  I  kept  no  copy  of  this  letter,  but  its 
purport  can  readily  be  inferred  from  Mr.  Greeley's  reply,  which  was 
addressed  to  me  at  Washington,  D.  C. 

The  following  is  a  copy  of  it,  and  the  original  will  be  filed  with  this 

paper : 

"NEW  YORK  TRIBUNE,"  NEW  YORK,  January  8,  1869. 
Dear  Sir  : 

I  cannot  be  in  Washington  soon,  nor  is  it  essential.  I  shall  try  to 
make  myself  felt  there  without.  I  enclose  my  article  on  your  mission,  from 
last  Monday's  Tribune,  though  I  presume  you  have  already  seen  it. 

I  beg  you  to  confer  directly  with  General  Grant,  and  also  with  Senator 
Stewart,  of  Nevada,  who  is  all  right.  I  wish  you  would  call  on  Senator 
Sumner,  especially.  He  has  faults  of  manner,  not  of  purpose. 

Yours,  HORACE  GREELEY. 

Hon.  A.  H.  H.  Stuart. 

I  was  induced  to  write  to  Mr.  Greeley  because  I  was  satisfied  that, 
although  he  entertained  many  opinions  in  which  I  could  not  concur, 
he  was  a  man  of  kind  heart  and  honest  purposes,  as  well  as  a  jour- 
nalist of  wonderful  ability. 

Mr.  Greeley's  letter,  when  read  to  the  committee,  gave  us  great 
encouragement,  and  he  faithfully  fulfilled  his  promise  "to  make 
himself  felt"  at  Washington.  His  paper  (the  Tribune)  contained, 
from  day  to  day,  leading  articles  in  support  of  the  objects  of  our 
mission,  which  had  great  effect  in  mollifying  the  prejudices  and 
moulding  the  sentiment  of  members  of  Congress. 

A  day  or  two  before  leaving  home  to  meet  the  committee  in 
Washington,  I  received  the  following  letter  from  Hon.  John  L. 
Marye,  of  Fredericksburg,  who  was  a  member  of  the  committee: 

FREDERICKSBURG,  Wednesday,  6th  Jan'y,  1868. 
My  Dear  Sir  : 

For  reasons  which  I  feel  assured  you  would  deem  adequate  (when 
stated  to  you)  I  am  satisfied  that  our  committee  would  be  MATERIALLY  aided 
by  the  presence  and  co-operation  of  Mr.  George  W.  Boiling,  of  Petersburg. 
I  write  to  suggest  that  you  write  to  him  and  request  him  to  be  at  Washington 
on  Friday  evening,  and  be  ready  to  confer  with  us. 

Mr.  Boiling  has  very  favorable  access  to  and  footing  with  General  Scho- 
field.  The  latter  would  communicate  freely  with  Mr.  B. 

It  is  almost  certain  that  all  of  our  committee  will  not  be  in  attendance, 
and  Mr.  B.  would  be  desirable  as  a  substitute. 

I  have  had  no  intercourse  with  Mr.  B.  since  our  conference  at  Richmond, 
but  am  sure  he  would  give  us  his  help. 

3 


34  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO    THE    UNION. 

I  am  informed  through  intelligent  sources  that  there  is  a  gentleman  at 
Norfolk,  Mr.  Gilbert  C.  Walker,  who  could  help  us  in  some  of  our  needs 
there.  He  is  a  Northern  man,  but  a  resident  of  Norfolk,  largely  and  influen- 
tially  concerned  in  its  commercial  and  financial  affairs  ;  a  man  of  integrity, 
intelligence,  experience  in  public  matters,  with  most  favorable  personal  rela- 
tions and  access  to  official  personages,  whose  ear  we  should  have.  Mr. 
Walker  has  been  a  decided,  out-spoken  foe  to  the  Underwood  Constitution, 
and  would  act  energetically  and  cordially  in  favor  of  our  movement.  I  do 
not  propose  that  he  should  be  placed  on  the  committee.  But  I  am  convinced 
that  it  would  be  well  for  you,  in  writing  to  Mr.  Boiling,  to  ask  Mr.  B.  to  write 
to  Mr.  Walker  at  once,  and  request  (as  coming  from  Mr.  Boiling)  that  he 
(Mr.  W.)  would  be  in  Washington  and  extend  his  aid  to  us.  I  write  it  haste. 

I  am  very  truly  yours, 

Hon.  A.  H.  H.  Stuart.  JNO.  L.  MARYE. 

On  receiving  this  letter,  I  promptly  wrote  to  Mr.  Boiling,  inviting 
him  to  meet  the  committee  at  Washington,  and  as  I  had  no  personal 
acquaintance  with  Mr.  Gilbert  C.  Walker,  I  requested  Mr.  Boiling 
to  give  to  Mr.  Walker  in  my  behalf  a  similar  invitation.  This  I 
presume  he  did,  as  both  Mr.  Boiling  and  Mr.  Walker  came  promptly 
to  Washington,  and  announced  their  readiness  to  co-operate  with 
the  committee.  It  was  in  this  way  that  Mr.  Walker  first  became 
known  to  the  people  of  Virginia  and  identified  with  her  cause. 

The  first  meeting  of  the  committee  was  held  at  the  National  Hotel, 
in  Washington  city,  on  the  evening  of  the  8th  of  January,  1869.  On 
calling  the  roll,  we  were  gratified  to  find  that  every  member  was 
present.  Our  proceedings  were  informal,  and  no  record  of  them, 
in  the  form  of  a  journal,  was  kept.  All  the  members  understood 
clearly  the  objects  for  which  we  had  met,  and  the  only  matter  which 
required  consideration  and  discussion  was  the  best  means  of  accom- 
plishing them.  Many  suggestions  were  made,  which  became  the 
subject  of  conversation,  and  were  adopted,  modified  or  abandoned, 
according  to  the  wishes  of  the  majority.  There  were  some  propo- 
sitions, however,  which  received  unanimous  approval :  ist.  That  the 
committee  should  meet  daily,  or  oftener,  for  conference  and  inter- 
change of  ideas  and  information  ;  2d.  That  we  should  invite  the 
co-operation  of  Mr.  Boiling,  Mr.  G.  C.  Walker,  and  his  brother,  Mr. 
Jonas  Walker,  and  of  all  citizens  of  Virginia,  who  might  be  in  Wash- 
ington, in  promoting  the  work  of  the  committee;  3d.  That  we  would, 
in  a  body,  call  on  the  President  (Andrew  Johnson)  to  pay  our  re- 
spects, but  that  as  the  close  of  his  term  of  office  was  so  near  at  hand, 
and  his  relations  to  Congress  of  such  an  unfriendly  character,  it  would 
be  useless  to  ask  assistance  from  him  ;  4th.  That  we  would,  without 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION.  35 

delay,  seek  an  interview  with  General  Grant,  the  President  elect,  ex- 
plain to  him  fully  the  grievances  of  which  we  complained,  and  earnestly 
invoke  his  aid  in  relieving  us  from  them  ;  5th.  That  the  members  of 
the  committee,  individually,  and  the  gentlemen  who  proposed  to  co- 
operate with  them,  should  proceed,  without  delay,  to  seek  confer- 
ences with  the  leading  members  of  the  two  Houses  of  Congress,  and 
explain  to  them  the  objects  of  our  mission,  and  impress  upon  them 
the  justice  of  our  claims,  and  seek  their  aid  in  obtaining  relief  from 
the  dangers  which  threatened  us.  v 

This  programme  was  duly  carried  into  effect.  The  committee,  in 
a  body,  called  on  President  Johnson,  and  were  courteously  received 
by  him,  but  no  effort  was  made  to  induce  him  to  take  any  official 
action  in  regard  to  the  objects  of  our  mission. 

It  is  proper  to  state,  that  shortly  after  "  the  Committee  of  Nine" 
assembled  in  Washington,  two  committees  or  delegations  from  Rich- 
mond made  their  appearance  in  Washington  on  behalf  of  the  Re- 
publican party,  one  of  them  consisted,  as  we  learned  unofficially,  of 
Mr.  Franklin  Stearns,  L.  H.  Chandler,  William  Forbes  and  Edgar 
Allen,  and  probably  others.  The  other,  which  was  led  by  Governor 
H.  H.  Wells,  was  more  numerous,  and  composed  of  white  and 
colored  men.  The  former,  which  consisted  of  men  of  intelligence, 
education  and  good  standing,  was  regarded  as  a  Committee  of  Ob- 
servation, and  was  supposed  to  be  present,  not  with  a  view  of  making 
factious  opposition  to  every  measure  of  relief  which  might  be  pro- 
posed by  the  Committee  of  Nine,  but  to  see  that  nothing  was  done 
prejudicial  to  the  interests  of  the  Conservative  Republicans.  The 
Wells  Committee,  on  the  other  hand,  was  emphatically  a  Committee 
of  Obstruction  and  Antagonism.  It  was  in  full  sympathy  with  all 
the  test  oaths,  disfranchisements,  and  other  objectionable  features  of 
the  Constitution,  and  opposed  to  any  change  in  any  of  its  provisions. 

CONFERENCE   WITH     RECONSTRUCTION    COMMITTEE    OF    HOUSE    OF 
REPRESENTATIVES. 

In  accordance  with  the  original  programme,  as  above  set  forth,  the 
committee  applied  for  and  obtained  permission  to  appear  before  the 
Reconstruction  Committee  of  the  House  of  Representatives  and  the 
Judiciary  Committee  of  the  Senate,  to  explain  to  them,  respectively, 
the  grievances  of  which  we  complained  and  the  nature  of  the  redress 
which  we  desired  to  obtain. 

It  is  not  necessary,  for  the  purposes  of  this  narrative,  to  give  in 


86  RESTORATION   OF  VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

detail  all  that  occurred  in  the  various  interviews  which  were  held  by 
the  Virginia  committee  with  the  committees  of  Congress.  It  is  suffi- 
cient to  mention  some  of  the  leading  incidents  which  tend  to  show 
the  varied  phases  of  public  opinion  of  that  day,  and  to  throw  light 
on  the  motives  and  purposes  of  those  who  were  prominent  actors  in 
them. 

At  the  hour  appointed  for  the  conference  with  the  Reconstruction 
Committee  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  all  the  members  of  the 
Committee  of  Nine  were  in  attendance.  We  were  politely  received 
by  ex-Governor  Boutwell,  chairman  of  the  Committee,  and  after  an 
interchange  of  salutations  and  introductions,  we  were  assigned  to  the 
seats  which  had  been  provided  for  us.  It  then  became  my  duty,  as 
chairman  of  the  committee,  to  open  the  interview  by  a  brief  explana- 
tion of  the  origin  of  our  committee  and  the  objects  of  our  mission. 
Before  I  had  concluded  my  remarks,  we  were  interrupted  by  the 
arrival  of  the  two  Richmond  committees,  headed,  respectively,  by 
Mr.  Franklin  Stearns  and  Governor  H.  H.  Wells,  who  expressed  a 
wish  to  be  present  at  the  interview.  This  was  readily  granted  with 
the  assent  of  all  parties.  As  the  sessions  of  the  Reconstruction 
Committee  were  necessarily  short,  being  limited  to  the  hour,  12  noon, 
appointed  for  the  meeting  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  and  as 
all  parties  desired  to  be  heard  in  support  of  their  respective  opinions, 
the  conference  was  continued  by  adjournment,  from  time  to  time, 
through  several  sessions  of  the  Committee,  during  which  full  and  free 
debate  was  allowed. 

This  discussion  was  conducted,  on  behalf  of  our  committee,  mainly 
by  Colonel  Baldwin.  He  had  been  speaker  of  the  House  of  Dele- 
gates in  the  session  of  the  General  Assembly  of  Virginia,  which  had 
recently  been  held  under  the  Peirpoint  administration,  and  was, 
therefore,  better  posted  than  any  other  member  of  the  committee  in 
regard  to  its  proceedings. 

After  he  had  presented,  with  great  clearness  and  force,  the  views 
of  the  committee,  Governor  H.  H.  Wells  took  the  floor  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  opinions  of  the  Radical  Committee,  of  which  he  was 
chairman.  As  reported  by  Mr.  Cowardin,  of  the  Dispatch,  he  spoke 
substantially  as  follows :  "  Governor  Wells  said  he  did  not  believe 
that  loyal  men  would  be  safe  from  wrong  and  outrage  if  the  white 
people  of  Virginia  were  all  enfranchised  ;  he  believed  that  the  only 
mode  of  protecting  them  would  be  to  adopt  the  Constitution  made  by 
the  Underwood  Convention  as  it  was ;  he  was  satisfied  that  the 
adoption  of  the  plan  of  the  '  Committee  of  Nine '  would  break  down 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE   UNION.  37 

the  Republican  party  and  destroy  the  last  hope  of  '  Loyalists '  in 
Virginia.  He  was  sure  the  people,  whatever  they  might  say  now, 
would,  in  a  few  years,  take  away  the  rights  of  the  negro  unless  the 
Republican  party  became  strong  enough  to  protect  them,  and  the 
only  way  to  secure  strength  to  that  party  was  to  give  it  power  to 
direct  the  restoration  of  the  State ;  none  but  the  Republican  party 
could  secure  justice  to  all  classes  and  rebuild  the  State.  There  could 
be  no  justice,  no  education,  no  prosperity,  save  through  the  Repub- 
lican party.  That  party  would  invite  immigration,  insure  the  safe 
investment  of  capital  and  put  Virginia  in  the  way  of  rapid  improve- 
ment. He  assured  the  Committee  that  there  were  ten  millions  of 
dollars  ready,  at  this  time,  to  be  brought  into  the  State  under  Repub- 
lican auspices  to  build  railroads,  etc.,  etc.  He  declared  that  the  new 
movement  had  not  the  support  of  Virginians;  that  he  did  not  believe 
that  ten  thousand  white  people  in  Virginia  would  support  it ;  that  if 
it  is  carried  it  would  have  to  be  carried  by  Republican  votes,  but  the 
Republican  party  would  not  vote  for  it.  They  were  opposed  to 
reconstructing  Virginia  in  that  way.  They  would  be  willing  to  see 
the  whites  enfranchised  after  a  few  years  when  it  could  be  done  safely, 
but  not  now." 

It  was  asked  whether,  if  the  plan  of  the  "  Nine"  succeeded,  the 
loyal  men  would  have  anything  to  compensate  them  for  the  conces- 
sion that  would  be  made.  He  replied,  "  None  whatever." 

The  same  reporter  (Mr.  Cowardin)  says  "  Colonel  Baldwin  spoke 
eloquently  for  an  hour  in  reply,  and  was  listened  to  with  marked  at- 
tention. In  reply  to  questions  of  the  Committee,  he  expressed  his 
confident  belief  that  the  people  of  the  State  would  support  and  carry 
out  in  good  faith  the  plan  which  he  advocated." 

By  request  of  the  committee,  Mr.  Franklin  Stearns,  of  Richmond, 
a  staunch  Republican,  and  Chairman  of  the  Conservative  Republi- 
can Committee,  addressed  the  Reconstruction  Committee  at  some 
length,  and  said  "that  since  the  defeat  of  the  Democratic  party 
(meaning  in  the  Presidential  election  of  November,  1868,)  the  people 
of  Virginia  were  ready  to  comply  with  the  reconstruction  laws,  and 
more  than  half  of  the  property  holders  were  ready  to  restore  the 
State  on  the  basis  proposed  by  the  Committee  of  Nine.  If  the  State 
was  restored  under  the  pending  Constitution,  with  disfranchisements 
and  county  organizations  stricken  out,  she  would  immediately  have 
her  prosperity  revived,  and  rapidly  grow  in  wealth  and  population. 
So  restored,  justice  would  be  impartially  administered,  and  all  classes 
completely  protected. 


38  RESTORATION  OF  VIRGINIA  TO  THE  UNION. 

"  Mr.  Stearns  condemned  the  '  Underwood  Constitution,'  and 
said  it  would  be  defeated  by  an  honest  vote  of  the  people,  but  that  its 
defeat  would  leave  the  State  without  a  civil  government,  and  subject 
to  all  the  whims  and  caprices  of  military  rule.  Hence,  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  Radical  party  of  Virginia,  he  favored  the  programme 
of  the  Conservative  Committee,  which  did  offer  the  people  some  pros- 
pect of  a  stable  government." 

The  reporter  adds  :  "  Mr.  Stearns  was  listened  to  attentively,  and 
his  statement  made  a  decided  impression." 

This  synopsis  of  the  discussion  before  the  Reconstruction  Com- 
mittee of  the  House  of  Representatives  will  be  sufficient  to  show  the 
nature  of  the  matters  in  issue,  and  the  spirit  in  which  they  were  pre- 
sented by  the  several  speakers. 

CONFERENCES   WITH   JUDICIARY   COMMITTEE   OF   SENATE. 

The  committee  also  had  interviews  with  the  Judiciary  Committee 
of  the  Senate  of  an  important  and  interesting  character.  But  it  is 
unnecessary  to  state  the  proceedings  in  detail.  In  all  material  mat- 
ters they  were  similar  to  the  proceedings  before  the  Committee  of 
Reconstruction  of  the  House.  This  Committee  was  one  of  extraor- 
dinary ability.  Among  the  members  were  Conkling,  of  New  York, 
Frelinghuysen,  of  New  Jersey,  Doolittle,  of  Wisconsin,  Trumbull,  of 
Illinois,  and  others  of  almost  equal  celebrity.  The  conference  hav- 
ing been  opened  by  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee  of  Nine,  by  a 
brief  statement  of  the  objects  of  their  mission,  and  of  their  objec- 
tions to  the  Underwood  Constitution,  the  further  discussion  of  the 
subject  was  turned  over  to  Colonel  Baldwin,  who  made  a  clear  and 
forcible  exposition  of  the  enormities  contained  in  the  Constitution. 
The  Senators  listened  with  great  attention,  and  seemed  to  be  desirous 
of  making  themselves  acquainted  with  the  subject.  They  asked  many 
questions,  wHich  were  promptly  answered,  giving  the  information 
that  was  sought.  The  interview  was  less  formal  than  that  with  the 
House  Committee,  and  the  discussion  of  a  more  colloquial  character, 
intended  to  promote  a  full  and  free  interchange  of  facts  and  opinions, 
and  the  members  manifested  an  earnest  desire  to  acquire  all  the 
knowledge  which  was  necessary  to  make  them  to  act  intelligently  on 
the  subject.  Colonel  Baldwin  was  the  principal  spokesman  on  behalf 
of  Virginia,  and  presented  the  views  of  the  committee  with  so  much 
clearness  and  force  as  to  leave  a  profound  impression  on  the  minds  of 
the  Senators.  Before  separating,  the  Senate  Committee  requested  the 
Committee  of  Nine  to  prepare  for  their  use,  a  condensed  statement, 
in  writing,  of  the  grievances  of  which  they  complained,  accompanied 


RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION.  39 

by  a  detailed  draft  of  the  amendments  which  they  desired  to  have  in- 
corporated into  the  Constitution.  This  was  accordingly  done  a  few 
days  afterwards.  The  paper  was  prepared  by  Colonel  Baldwin  with 
great  care,  and  after  thorough  scrutiny  by  the  committee  was,  on 
1 8th  January,  1869,  adopted  and  signed  by  every  member  of  it,  and 
sent  to  the  Senate  Committee.  The  full  text  of  this  paper  was  pub- 
lished, and  is  to  be  found  in  the  columns  of  the  newspapers  of  that 
day.  It  is  as  follows  : 

To  the  Judiciary  Committee 

of  the  United  States  Senate  : 

On  behalf  of  the  delegation  of  citizens  of  Virginia,  and  in  accordance 
with  the  request  of  your  committee,  we  beg  leave  respectfully  to  submit,  in 
the  form  of  amendments  to  House  Bill  1485,  now  under  your  consideration, 
such  modifications  of  the  Constitution  proposed  by  the  late  Convention  as, 
in  our  opinion,  will,  under  all  the  circumstances,  lead  to  its  acceptance  by 
the  people  of  Virginia. 

It  is  due  to  candor  to  say,  in  this  connection,  that  those  who  sent  us  here 
expressed,  as  we  believe,  the  real  feelings  and  purposes  of  the  people  of 
Virginia  when  they  declared,  "  while  the  conviction  of  the  undersigned  and, 
as  they  believe,  of  the  people  of  Virginia  generally  remains  unchanged,  that 
the  freedmen  of  the  Southern  States,  in  their  present  uneducated  condition, 
are  not  prepared  for  the  intelligent  exercise  of  the  elective  franchise  and  the 
performance  of  other  duties  connected  with  public  affairs,  and  are  therefore, 
at  this  time,  unsafe  depositaries  of  political  power ;  yet,  in  view  of  the  ver- 
dict of  public  opinion  in  favor  of  their  being  allowed  to  exercise  the  right 
of  suffrage,  as  expressed  in  the  recent  elections,  the  undersigned  are  pre- 
pared, and  they  believe  the  majority  of  the  people  of  Virginia  are  prepared, 
to  surrender  their  opposition  to  its  incorporation  into  their  fundamental  law 
as  an  offering  on  the  altar  of  peace,  and  in  the  hope  that  union  and  harmony 
may  be  restored  on  the  basis  of  universal  suffrage  and  universal  amnesty." 

Taking  it,  then,  to  be  established  as  the  policy  of  this  government  to 
require  in  Virginia  a  constitutional  recognition  and  enforcement  of  the  civil 
and  political  equality  of  all  men  before  the  law,  we  have,  in  the  amendments 
proposed,  inserted  all  the  provisions  looking  to  that  result  which  Congress 
has  heretofore  deemed  proper,  and  we  have  left  undisturbed  all  the  provi- 
sions of  the  proposed  Constitution  in  any  manner  relating  to  that  subject. 

The  first  modification  of  the  proposed  Constitution  suggested  by  us,  is  to 
strike  from  it  all  those  features  of  disfranchisement  and  disqualification,  and 
all  those  elements  of  bitterness  and  strife,  political,  sectional,  and  sectarian, 
which,  in  our  judgment,  are  wholly  incompatible  with  good  government  and 
good  feeling,  and  tend  to  perpetuate  alienations  and  discords,  which  all  good 
citizens  must  deprecate.  The  power  of  a  State  to  subject  any  of  its  citizens 
to  disabilities  for  offences  against  the  United  States  has  been  seriously  ques- 
tioned. It  seems  to  be  conceded  that  for  the  purpose  of  the  punishment  no 
such  power  exists,  and  that  disqualifications  and  disfranchisements  are  only 
admissible  as  measures  of  precaution  and  safety. 


40  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

In  this  point  of  view,  it  is  worthy  of  consideration  that  since  the  close  of 
the  war  the  people  of  Virginia  have  been  living  without  disfranchisement  or 
disability  of  any  kind,  under  a  government  whose  legislative  and  judicial 
departments  and  whose  local  organizations  have  been  in  the  hands  of  the 
very  classes  whom  it  is  sought  bv  the  proposed  Constitution  to  exclude  from 
every  position  of  trust  in  the  State.  We  claim,  with  confidence,  that  the 
result  has  beep  that  the  supremacy  of  law  and  order  has  been  as  fully  main- 
tained, and  that  the  functions  of  good  government  have  been  as  well  per- 
formed, in  Virginia  as  in  any  State  in  the  Union. 

It  is  believed  that  Article  III,  section  one,  paragraph  four,  would  dis- 
franchise not  less  than  ten  or  fifteen  thousand  voters  in  the  State,  including 
all  those  whom  the  people  have  been  accustomed  to  trust  in  public  employ- 
ments. 

Article  III,  section  seven,  would  disqualify  for  every  position  of  public 
trust  not  less  than  ninety-five  of  every  hundred  of  the  white  people  of  Vir- 
ginia who  would  otherwise  be  eligible,  and  would,  in  connection  with  sec- 
tion three  of  the  same  Article,  extend  the  like  disability  to  serve  upon  juries. 

It  is  believed  that  there  is  no  advocate  of  universal^  negro  suffrage  who 
will  not  agree  that  in  its  application  to  Virginia  at  this  time  it  is  a  fearful 
experiment,  requiring  for  its  success  all  the  wisdom  and  experience  that  can 
be  brought  to  its  management ;  and  it  is  respectively  submitted  that  to  ex- 
clude from  participation  in  State  or  local  government  at  this  time  so  large  a 
proportion  of  those  who,  by  experience  in  public  affairs,  are  fitted  to  deal 
with  this  great  problem,  would  be  unwise  and  unsafe. 

We  earnestly  declare  that,  in  our  belief,  it  would  be  wholly  inconsistent 
with  domestic  tranquility,  public  order,  or  the  security  of  the  lives,  liberty 
or  property  of  the  great  body  of  the  white  population  of  Virginia. 

The  provision  of  Article  XI,  relating  to  church  property,  is  an  attempt 
to  reverse  the  settled  policy  of  Virginia,  which  restricts  the  ownership  of 
church  property  in  amount,  and  confines  it  strictly  to  the  local  religious 
congregation.  The  purpose  is  to  enable  "ecclesiastical  bodies"  outside 
of  Virginia,  in  opposition  to  the  legislation  of  the  State,  and  against  its 
judicial  decisions,  to  take  the  churches  of  Virginia  from  the  local  congre- 
gations who  built  them.  The  provision  opens  a  controversy,  full  of  all  the 
combined  bitterness  of  party  and  section  and  sect,  over  every  Presbyterian 
and  Methodist  church  building  in  Virginia. 

The  next  modification  suggested  by  us  is  to  strike  from  the  proposed 
Constitution,  and  thus  to  leave  to  legislative  enactment  or  modification,  the 
whole  of  the  cumbrous  machinery  for  local  organization,  government  and 
policy,  which,  in  our  judgment,  is  clearly  unfitted  to  the  condition  of  the 
State,  and  if  fixed  to  the  Constitution  will  be  a  cause  of  embarrassment  and 
difficulty  and  strife,  seriously  affecting  the  public  peace  and  the  harmony 
and  good  order  of  society. 

The  population  of  Virginia  is  very  sparsely  and  unequally  distributed  over 
the  territory  of  the  State,  and  the  physical  and  geographical  features  of  the 
country  are  such  as  to  render  wholly  impracticable  any  arbitrary  plan  of 
subdivision  for  local  purposes.  The  most  we  have  been  able  to  do  thus  far 
is  to  make  the  counties  the  units  of  local  government,  and  to  give  to  the 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  41 

county  courts,  composed  of  all  the  county  justices,  the  control  and  direction 
of  the  local  government  and  police. 

In  view  of  the  introduction  into  our  system  of  so  large  a  political  element 
so  unequally  distributed  as  to  result  in  the  complete  predominance  of  the 
whole  white  race  in  one  section  of  the  State  and  of  the  colored  race  in 
another  section,  we  are  very  earnestly  of  opinion  that  any  system  of  local 
government  and  police  engrafted  upon  the  Constitution  and  placed  under 
the  absolute  control  of  limited  districts,  will  naturally  incur  the  distrust  and 
excite  the  apprehensions  of  the  local  minority  and  tend  to  collisions  calcu- 
lated to  impair  personal  security  and  endanger  the  public  peace. 

The  difficulties  surrounding  the  subjects  of  local  taxation  and  education, 
in  regard  to  which  we  are  satisfied  that  the  proposed  system  will  be  found 
unequal  and  inefficient  in  its  operation,  and  in  its  results  intolerably  expensive 
and  oppressive. 

The  solution  of  these  difficulties,  which  we  propose,  is  to  strike  the  whole 
of  this  system  from  the  Constitution  and  leave  it  to  the  Legislature,  in  which 
all  localities,  interests  and  classes  will  be  fully  represented,  to  regulate  the 
whole  subject  by  laws  which  will  be  at  all  times  open  to  modification  and 
improvement,  such  as  experience  may  suggest  or  the  public  interest  may 
require. 

The  next  modification  proposed  by  us  is  to  strike  out  the  provisions  in 
Article  XI  relating  to  homestead  and  other  exemptions.  The  laws  in 
Virginia  now  in  force  provide  for  homestead  and  other  exemptions,  pros- 
pective in  their  operation.  The  provisions  of  these  laws  are  believed  to  be 
not  materially  different  from  those  in  the  proposed  Constitution,  except  in 
regard  to  past  indebtedness,  as  to  which  we  regard  the  proposed  provision 
as  clearly  in  conflict  with  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  The  chief 
importance  which  we  attach  to  striking  out  this  provision  grows  out  of  its 
injurious  effect  upon  the  minds  of  the  people,  whose  necessities  already 
incline  them  to  look  with  favor  upon  any  suggestion  of  relief  from  pecuniary 
obligation. 

The  only  remaining  suggestion  of  modification  is  as  to  the  maximum  of 
taxation  for  local  free  school  purposes  in  Article  VIII,  section  8. 

It  will  be  observed  that  we  have  made  no  objection  to  the  school  system 
proposed,  except  so  far  as  it  depends  on  the  local  organization,  to  which  we 
have  already  referred. 

No  objection  is  offered  in  any  quarter  to  the  establishment  of  a  thorough 
system  of  free  public  schools,  at  least  as  rapidly  as  the  proposed  Constitu- 
tion requires ;  and  although  we  have  asked  to  strike  out  the  mode  of  local 
taxation  proposed,  we  have  suggested  a  modification  which  avoids  any 
diminution  of  the  amount  to  be  raised  by  taxation  for  public  free  school 
purposes. 

In  suggesting  the  modifications  referred  to,  we  by  no  means  wish  to  be 
understood  as  conceding  that  the  proposed  Constitution  is  free  from  what 
we  regard  as  important  defects  in  other  particulars,  but  we  do  not  under- 
stand it  to  be  the  purpose  of  Congress  to  interfere  in  such  matters  further 
than  may  be  required  by  high  considerations  affecting  the  integrity  of  the 
Constitution  and  the  maintenance  of  justice  and  domestic  tranquility.  We 
have  therefore  confined  our  objections  to  provisions  of  the  proposed  Con- 


42  RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

stitution,  falling  properly,  as  we  believe,  within  the  scope  of  such  an  inter- 
position. 

The  clauses  which  we  ask  to  have  stricken  out  from  the  proposed  Consti- 
tution are  of  different  degrees  of  importance,  but  the  least  important,  we 
think,  will  be  found  to  involve  some  grave  public  mischief  or  injustice. 
Those  included  in  our  first  suggestion  could  not  but  plunge  our  State  into 
civil  anarchy  and  discord,  and  disturb  the  general  and  growing  harmony 
of  the  two  races  of  our  people,  if  not  to  array  them  in  deplorable  hostility 
to  one  another.  They  would  arrest  immigration,  paralyze  all  forms  of  in- 
dustry, destroy  our  domestic  peace  and  hope  of  prosperity,  and  render  us  a 
burden  to  the  Union  instead  of  an  important  addition  to  its  resources, 
wealth,  credit  and  power. 

In  our  personal  interview  with  the  Committee,  we  called  their  attention  to 
provisions  of  the  proposed  Constitution,  and  especially  to  that  relating  to 
usury,  as  instances  of  the  insertion  into  a  Constitution  of  matters  peculiarly 
proper  to  be  left  to  ordinary  legislation,  the  provision  in  regard  to  usury 
is  one  new  in  Virginia,  and  will  establish  a  policy  which,  whatever  may  be 
its  merits,  must  seriously  affect  all  the  material  interests  of  our  people. 

It  is  respectfully  submitted,  for  the  consideration  of  the  Committee, 
whether  a  measure  of  legislation  so  important,  and  in  regard  to  which 
opinion  is  so  much  divided,  ought  to  be  fixed  in  the  Constitution  and  so 
placed  beyond  legislative  control. 

As  to  the  mode  of  granting  relief  from  the  mischievous  provisions  to 
which  we  have  referred — to-wit :  by  act  of  Congress,  suggesting  modifica- 
tions as  fundamental  conditions  precedent,  we  desire  to  say  that  it  has  been 
suggested  as  the  result  of  an  examination  of  the  precedents  found  in  the 
past  legislation  of  Congress,  and  upon  consultation  with  a  number  of  the 
wisest  and  most  experienced  members  of  both  Houses.  In  the  preparation 
of  the  amendments  proposed  to  the  pending  bill,  we  have  endeavored  fairly 
to  follow  the  precedents  established  m  like  cases,  and  we  may  be  permitted 
to  suggest,  in  conclusion,  that  we  believe  it  will  be  found  that  the  modifica- 
tions proposed  by  us  will,  in  fact,  conform  the  proposed  Constitution  to  the 
principles  and  policy  of  the  Reconstruction  acts. 

It  is  perhaps  proper  to  say  we,  and  those  with  whom  we  act,  though  con- 
curring, as  we  believe,  with  the  people  of  Virginia,  do  not  claim  to  be 
authorized  to  speak  for  them. 

Respectfully,  your  obedient  servants, 

ALEXANDER  H.  H.  STUART, 
JOHN  B.  BALDWIN, 
WYNDHAM  ROBERTSON, 
W.  S.  SUTHERLIN, 
JAMES  NEESON, 
J.  F.  JOHNSON, 
W.  L.  OWEN, 
J.  L.  MARYE,  JR., 
J.  F.  SLAUGHTER, 

Committee. 
WASHINGTON  CITY,  January  18.  1869. 


RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  43 

The  following  are  the  changes  in  the  proposed  Virginia  Constitution, 
which  the  committee  will  ask  Congress  to  enact : 

House  of  Representatives,  1485.— Bill  entitled  "  An  act  providing  for  an 
election  in  Virginia." 

Amendments  suggested  for  the  consideration  of  the  Senate  Committee 
of  the  Judiciary: 

First  Amendment. — Strike  out  the  whole  of  the  first  section  after  the 
enacting  clause,  and  insert  in  lieu  thereof  three  sections,  as  follows  : 

That  the  State  of  Virginia  shall  be  entitled  and  admitted  to  representation 
in  Congress  as  a  State  of  the  Union  when  the  voters  of  the  said  State — who 
at  the  time  of  the  election  hereinafter  provided  for,  shall  be  registered  and 
qualified  as  such  in  compliance  with  the  acts  of  Congress,  known  as  the  Re- 
construction acts — shall  have  agreed  to  and  ratified  the  Constitution  adopted 
by  the  Convention  which  met  in  Richmond,  Virginia,  on  the  3d  day  of  De- 
cember, Anno  Domini,  1867,  subject  to  and  in  accordance  with  the  conditions 
and  modifications  hereinafter  declared  and  proposed. 

SECTION  2.  And  be  it  further  enacted,  That  the  foregoing  section  is  sub- 
ject to  the  following  fundamental  conditions  precedent,  and  shall  not  take 
effect  until  the  same  and  each  of  them  are  fully  accepted  by  the  voters  of 
Virginia  at  the  said  election. 

I.  The  Constitution  of  said  State  shall  never  be  so  amended  or  changed 
as  to  deprive  any  citizen  or  class  of  citizens  of  the  United  States  of  the 
right  to  vote  in  said  State  who  are  entitled  to  vote  by  the  Constitution 
thereof  herein  recognized,  except  as  a  punishment  for  such  crimes  as  are 
now  felonies  at  common  law,  whereof  they  shall  have  been  duly  convicted 
under  laws  equally  applicable  to  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  State :  provided, 
that  any  alteration  of  said  Constitution  may  be  made  with  regard  to  time 
and  place  of  residence  of  voters. 

II.  That  in  the  adoption  and  ratification  of  said  Constitution  there  shall 
be  omitted  therefrom  the  following  parts  and  provisions  thereof,  which,  in 
the  opinion  of  the  Congress,  are  unnecessary  for  the  protection  of  any  right, 
and  tend  to  retard  and  prevent  the  restoration  of  that  harmony  and  good 
will  among  the  people  which  are  among  the  chief  objects  sought  to  be 
attained  by  the  Reconstruction  acts  aforesaid,  viz. : 

1.  The  provision  for  disfranchisement  and  disqualification  contained  in 
Article  III,  section  one,  clause  four,  and  in  section  seven  of  the  same  Article, 
and  that  relating  to  church  property  in  Article  XI  of  said  Constitution. 

2.  The  provision  for  local  organization,  government  and  police  contained 
in  Article  VI,  sections  thirteen  to  twenty-one  inclusive,  those  in  Article 
VII  and  in  the  two  last  sentences  of  Article  VIII,  section  eight. 

3.  The  provision  relating  to  homestead  and  other  exemptions  in  Article 
XI,  sections  one  to  seven,  inclusive. 

III.  That  the  limitations  upon  the  power  of  taxation  for  public  free  school 
purposes  in  Article  VIII,  section  eight,  be  changed  from  five  mills  to  ten 
mills. 

SECTION  3.  And  be  it  further  enacted,  That  the  said  Constitution,  subject 


44  RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

to  the  said  fundamental  conditions,  and  with  the  modifications  aforesaid,  be 
submitted  for  ratification  to  the  voters  registered  and  qualified  as  aforesaid, 
according  to  the  provisions  of  the  Reconstruction  acts,  on  the  fourth  Thurs" 
day  of  April,  1869.  The  vote  on  said  Constitution  shall  be  "  for  the  Consti- 
tution, subject  to  the  fundamental  conditions  prescribed  by  Congress,"  or 
"against  the  Constitution."  The  said  election  shall  be  held  at  the  same 
places  where  the  election  for  delegates  to  said  convention  was  held,  and 
under  the  regulations  to  be  prescribed  by  the  Commanding  General  of  the 
military  district  and  the  returns  made  to  him  as  directed  by  law. 

Second  Amendment. — Strike  out  in  section  five,  line  four,  the  word  "Sep- 
tember," and  insert  "June." 

Proposed  Title. — "An  act  to  provide  for  admitting  the  State  of  Virginia  to 
representation  in  Congress." 

CONFERENCES  WITH  GENERAL  GRANT. 

Very  soon  after  their  arrival  in  Washington,  the  committee  took 
steps  necessary  to  obtain  an  interview  with  General  Grant,  President- 
elect, who  was  then  in  the  city  awaiting  his  inauguration.  With  this 
end  in  view,  the  committee  called  on  General  Schofield,  then  acting 
Secretary  of  War,  and,  after  explaining  to  him  the  objects  of  their 
mission,  asked  the  favor  of  him  to  make  known  to  General  Grant 
their  desire  to  call  on  him  to  pay  their  respects  and  have  an  oppor- 
tunity of  explaining  to  him  the  objects  of  their  visit  to  Washington. 
General  Schofield,  who  expressed  full  sympathy  with  the  objects  we 
had  in  view,  promptly  agreed  to  do  so.  He  accordingly  called  on 
General  Grant,  and  made  an  arrangement  with  him  to  receive  the 
committee  on  the  I4th  of  January  at  a  specified  hour.  About  half 
an  hour  before  the  time  indicated,  the  majority  of  the  committee 
met  in  their  room,  with  a  view  of  going  in  a  body  to  General  Grant's 
headquarters.  Unfortunately,  however,  in  consequence  of  some 
misapprehension  about  the  hour  of  meeting,  two  or  three  of  the 
committee  (of  whom  Colonel  Baldwin  was  one)  failed  to  attend. 
After  waiting  as  long  as  they  could,  hoping  the  absent  members 
would  appear,  the  members  present  proceeded  to  the  office  of  Gene- 
ral Schofield,  who  kindly  agreed  to  accompany  them  to  headquarters 
and  introduce  them  to  General  Grant.  The  committee  was  received 
with  frankness  and  courtesy  by  General  Grant,  who  entered  into 
general  conversation  with  its  members  in  a  familiar  way,  which  at 
once  put  every  one  at  ease. 

The  committee,  through  their  chairman,  then  proceeded  to  explain 
to  him  the  objects  of  their  visit  to  Washington.  The  objectionable 
features  of  the  Underwood  Constitution  were  fully  explained  to  him, 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE   UNION.  45 

and  also  the  disastrous  consequences  which  would  necessarily  follow 
their  adoption.  General  Grant  gave  close  attention  to  all  that  was 
said,  and  showed,  by  the  pertinent  and  searching  questions  which 
he  asked  from  time  to  time,  that  he  thoroughly  understood  and  ap- 
preciated the  injustice  and  oppression  which  would  be  done  to  the 
people  of  Virginia  by  adopting  the  Constitution  without  amendment. 

The  conversation  then  became  of  a  more  general  character,  in  the 
course  of  which  he  did  not  hesitate  to  express  in  strong  terms  his 
opposition  to  the  test-oaths  and  disfranchisements  embodied  in  the 
Constitution.  He  referred,  however,  to  the  fact  that,  for  the  present, 
he  was  a  mere  military  officer,  and,  as  such,  powerless  to  render  any 
assistance.  His  language  and  manner  throughout  the  interview  left 
no  doubt  on  the  minds  of  the  committee  that  if  the  Senate  should 
fail  to  act  on  the  bill  then  pending  until  after  his  inauguration,  he 
would  interpose  in  some  way  to  afford  relief.  The  interview  lasted 
an  hour  or  two,  and  the  results  were  very  gratifying  to  the  com- 
mittee. 

When  the  committee  returned  to  their  hotel  they  found  their  asso- 
ciates, who  had  been  disappointed  in  not  attending  the  interview, 
much  mortified  at  their  mistake  in  regard  to  the  time  of  holding  it, 
which  had  prevented  their  participation  in  it. 

During  the  next  day  rumors  reached  the  committee  that  mis- 
chievous persons  had  represented  to  the  friends  of  General  Grant 
that  the  absence  of  the  members,  who  had  failed  to  attend  the  inter- 
view, was  intentional  and  a  premeditated  mark  of  disrespect  to  Gene- 
ral Grant.  This  absurd  and  malicious  falsehood  naturally  created  a 
strong  feeling  among  all  the  members  of  the  committee,  and  they  at 
once  determined  to  give  the  most  emphatic  contradiction  to  it,  by 
seeking  a  second  interview  with  General  Grant,  to  enable  every  mem- 
ber of  the  committee  to  be  present.  A  request  to  that  effect  was 
accordingly  made,  which  was  promptly  granted. 

At  the  time  appointed  for  the  second  interview  every  member  of 
the  committee  was  present,  and  a  number  of  distinguished  gentle- 
men from  Virginia,  who  had  asked  leave  to  accompany  the  com- 
mittee. The  whole  party  then  proceeded  in  a  body  to  General 
Grant's  headquarters.  They  were  cordially  received,  and  the  gen- 
tlemen of  the  committee,  who  had  not  been  present  at  the  former 
interview,  were  afforded  an  opportunity  of  explaining  the  mistake 
which  had  caused  their  absence,  and  their  regret  that  they  had  been 
thereby  denied  the  pleasure  of  participating  in  it. 

The  most  interesting  incident  which  I  can  recall  in  connection  with 


46  RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

this  interview  was  the  following  :  Shortly  after  all  the  gentlemen 
present  had  paid  their  respects  to  General  Grant  and  been  seated, 
he  turned  to  the  chairman  of  the  committee,  and,  addressing  him  by 
name,  said  :  "  Mr.  Stuart,  since  you  were  here  the  other  day  I  have 
been  thinking  a  good  deal  of  the  matters  discussed  in  our  interview, 
and  looking  somewhat  into  the  provisions  of  your  proposed  Con- 
stitution ;  and  I  must  confess  that,  bad  as  the  provisions  in  regard  to 
test-oaths  and  disfranchisements  unquestionably  are,  it  seems  to  me 
that  the  county  organization  feature  is,  if  possible,  worse.  In  the 
eastern  portion  of  your  State  the  negro  population  is  greatly  in  ex 
cess  of  the  white.  Under  the  county  organization  features  of  the 
new  Constitution,  as  proposed,  you  must  have  in  that  section  of  the 
State  negro  judges,  negro  juries,  negro  magistrates,  negro  super- 
visors, and  negro  sheriffs  and  constables  ;  in  other  words,  a  negro 
government.  Under  such  a  condition  of  things,  no  decent  white  man 
can  afford  to  live  in  that  part  of  the  State,  and  they  will  be  compelled 
to  move  away.  In  the  western  part  of  the  State,  where  the  whites 
predominate,  the  condition  of  things  will  be  reversed,  and  the  negroes 
will  have  to  remove.  In  this  way  the  two  races  will  be  segregated 
by  a  geographical  line,  which  is  greatly  to  be  deplored  ;  and  what  is 
more,  the  labor  of  the  State  will  be  separated  from  the  capital,  and 
the  productive  power  of  the  State  will  be  greatly  impaired,  if  not 
destroyed."  I  believe  I  report  the  language  of  General  Grant  with 
almost  absolutely  literal  accuracy.  His  sentiments,  as  well  as  the 
language  in  which  he  expressed  them,  made  a  profound  impression 
on  my  mind  at  the  time,  and  have  remained  fresh  in  my  memory, 
because  I  have  had  frequent  occasions  to  recall  and  repeat  them  in 
private  conversations,  from  time  to  time,  since  they  were  first  uttered. 
A  free  talk  between  General  Grant  and  the  members  of  the  com- 
mittee then  followed,  in  which  he  clearly  indicated  his  sympathy  with 
our  movement,  and  his  desire  to  see  Virginia  restored  to  the  Union 
on  fair  and  honorable  terms.  The  interview  was  gratifying  to  every 
member  of  the  committee,  and  they  left  him,  cheered  by  the  confi- 
dent belief  that  at  an  early  day  after  his  inauguration,  his  strong 
arm  would  be  interposed  for  the  relief  of  Virginia. 

INTERCOURSE   OF   MEMBERS   OF    THE  COMMITTEE  WITH   SENATORS 
AND    REPRESENTATIVES. 

Immediately  after  the  organization  of  the  Committee  of  Nine  in 
Washington,    it  was  agreed   that   the  members  of  the  committee, 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO    THE    UNION.  47 

singly  or  in  pairs,  should  call  on  as  many  of  the  leading  members  of 
Congress  as  they  could  conveniently  visit,  either  at  the  capitol  or 
their  lodgings.  Many  other  gentlemen  from  Virginia,  who  were  in 
sympathy  with  the  objects  of  the  committee,  were  invited  to  co- 
operate with  us  in  this  important  work.  Among  those  who  were  most 
efficient  in  this  department  of  service,  were  Gilbert  C.  Walker,  and  his 
brother,  Mr.  Jonas  Walker.  Being  in  some  way  connected  by  marriage 
with  Senator  Stewart,  of  Nevada,  they  had  ready  access  to  him ,  and 
at  an  early  day  secured  his  active  assistance  in  promoting  the  objects 
of  the  committee.  Mr.  Gilbert  C.  Walker,  being  a  man  of  fine  intel- 
lect, imposing  appearance  and  manners,  and  a  good  talker,  was  well 
fitted  to  make  a  favorable  impression  on  all  classes  of  men.  Having 
been  born  and  reared  in  the  interior  of  New  York,  and  being  an 
avowed  Republican  in  politics,  he  had  no  difficulty  in  approaching 
Northern  Republicans  and  explaining  to  them  the  gross  injustice  and 
oppression  which  would  be  imposed  on  Virginia  by  the  Underwood 
Constitution.  He  devoted  his  whole  time,  for  a  week  or  ten  days,  to 
this  good  work,  and  reported  the  results  of  his  labors,  from  time  to 
time,  to  the  committee.  They  were  deeply  impressed  with  the  value 
of  his  services  in  mitigating  the  asperity  of  party  and  sectional  preju- 
dices, and  awakening  a  more  kindly  sentiment  in  the  minds  of 
Northern  men.  It  was  by  work  of  this  kind  that  Gilbert  C.  Walker 
won  for  himself  the  favorable  regard  of  all  Virginians  who  were  then 
in  Washington,  and  opened  the  way  to  the  conspicuous  position 
which  he  afterwards  filled  in  Virginia. 

CLOSING   SCENES   IN    WASHINGTON. 

After  the  lapse  of  ten  days  or  more  spent  in  earnest  efforts  to 
rescue  Virginia  from  the  ruin  which  threatened  her,  the  committee  felt 
that  they  had  fulfilled  the  duties  which  had  been  entrusted  to  them. 
They  had  done  all  that  they  could  hope  to  accomplish  at  that  time. 
They  had  aroused  the  attention,  not  merely  of  Virginia  and  the 
Southern  States,  but  of  the  whole  North,  to  the  enormities  of  the 
"  Underwood  Constitution."  They  had  secured,  as  advocates  of  jus- 
tice to  Virginia,  the  New  York  Tribune,  New  York  Times,  Boston 
Advertiser,  Chicago  Tribune,  and  other  leading  organs  of  public 
opinion  in  the  North  and  Northwest.  They  had  arrested  the  pas- 
sage of  the  House  Bill  in  the  Senate.  They  had  received  satisfac- 
tory assurances  from  General  Grant  that — as  soon  as  practicable  after 
his  inauguration  as  President — he  would  bring  the  subject  to  the 


48  RESTORATION  OF  VIRGINIA  TO  THE    UNION. 

attention  of  Congress,  and  endeavor  to  obtain  for  Virginia  substantial 
relief.  In  a  word,  the  committee  felt  that  they  had  faithfully  tilled 
the  political  field  and  sown  good  seed,  which,  at  the  proper  time, 
would  germinate  and  bear  an  abundant  harvest  of  blessings.  If  the 
committee  had  been  able  to  accomplish  nothing  more  than  the  de- 
feat by  the  Senate  of  the  passage  of  the  House  Bill,  submitting  the 
Underwood  Constitution  without  amendment  for  ratification,  they 
would  have  felt  that  they  had  rendered  a  service  of  incalculable  value 
to  the  State. 

Let  us  pause  a  moment  and  contemplate  the  condition  of  things 
which  existed  when  what  was  popularly  called  the  "  new  movement  " 
was  set  on  foot.  The  House  Bill  had  been  introduced  and  passed 
through  all  its  stages  by  the  House  of  Representatives  without  objec- 
tion or  debate.  This  occurred  a  few  days  before  Christmas  recess  of 
1868,  and  the  Bill  was  sent  to  the  Senate  for  concurrence.  Parlia- 
mentary rules  required  (unless  temporarily  suspended)  a  reference  to 
the  Judiciary  Committee,  and  a  report  from  that  Committee  before 
the  Bill  could  be  put  on  its  passage.  The  delay  thus  caused  pre- 
vented its  passage  by  the  Senate  before  the  Christmas  vacation. 

No  fair-minded  man  will  venture  to  deny  that,  if  some  responsible 
party  had  not  interposed  objections  to  the  Bill,  it  would  have  been 
taken  up  and  passed  by  the  Senate  as  it  had  been  by  the  House, 
without  debate.  The  single  question  then  submitted  to  the  people 
of  Virginia  would  have  been  the  "ratification"  or  "rejection"  of 
the  Underwood  Constitution  which,  in  popular  parlance,  would  have 
been  a  choice  between  "the  devil  and  the  deep  sea."  If  the  Consti- 
tution were  ratified,  according  to  the  estimate  made  by  the  "  Com- 
mittee of  Nine"  in  their  paper  submitted  to  the  Judiciary  Committee 
of  the  Senate,  NINETY-FIVE  PER  CENT,  of  the  adult  white  popula- 
tion of  Virginia  would  have  been  not  only  rendered  ineligible  to  any 
office,  but  deprived  of  the  right  of  suffrage,  and  rendered  incompetent 
to  serve  on  a  jury,  civil  or  criminal ! 

Under  these  circumstances,  we  would  have  had  Wells  for  Governor, 
backed  by  a  constituency  consisting  mainly  of  ignorant  negroes  and 
depraved  whites.  The  better  class  of  white  people  would  have  been 
powerless.  We  should  have  had,  in  the  graphic  language  of  General 
Grant,  "negro  judges,  negro  sheriffs,  negro  juries,  negro  magistrates 
— in  a  word,  a  negro  government — which  would  have  compelled 
every  decent  white  man  to  move  away  ! ' ' 

But  this  is  not  all.  Under  such  a  condition  of  things,  what  was  to 
prevent  any  emancipated  slave  from  bringing  suit  against  his  late 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE   UNION.  49  . 

master  to  recover  compensation  for  his  service  while  he  was  held  in 
slavery  ?  Negro,  or  carpet-bag,  judges  would  have  been  prompt  to 
sustain  such  actions,  and  ignorant  and  interested  juries  eager  to  award 
verdicts  for  heavy  damages.  Each  negro  juryman  would  have  had  a 
personal  interest  in  the  question,  as  a  verdict  in  one  case  would  estab- 
lish a  precedent  to  enable  him  to  maintain  a  similar  suit  against  his 
former  master  !  In  this  way,  under  the  forms  of  law,  the  estate  of 
every  man,  who  had  ever  been  a  slave-holder,  might  have  been  con- 
fiscated ! 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Constitution  were  "rejected,"  the  people 
of  Virginia  would  have  been  remitted  to  despotic  military  sway,  with 
Wells,  a  mere  dependent  Governor,  prepared  to  execute  the  arbitrary 
behests  of  the  commander,  for  the  time  being,  of  Military  District 
No.  i  ! 

Nor  could  we  have  looked  to  Congress  for  relief  !  It  would  have 
been  truly  said  we  had  contumaciously  rejected  a  Constitution,  to 
which  we  had  refused  to  offer  any  objections,  and  which  had  been  ap- 
proved by  the  unanimous  vote  of  both  Houses  of  Congress  ! 

There  were  some  facts  which  had  occurred  in  Richmond  within 
the  year  1868,  the  year  preceding  the  visit  of  the  "Committee  of 
Nine"  to  Washington,  which,  while  they  did  not  seem  to  attract 
public  attention  at  the  time,  were  full  of  significance  to  every  thought- 
ful observer. 

Pierpoint  had  been  recognized  and  regularly  installed  as  Governor 
of  Virginia  in  May,  1865.  His  administration  had  been  as  fair  as 
the  people  of  Virginia  had  a  right  to  expect  under  the  circumstances. 
A  session  of  the  Legislature  was  held  while  he  occupied  the  Execu- 
tive Mansion,  and  the  Convention  called  to  frame  a  Constitution  met 
in  Richmond  on  the  3d  of  December,  1867,  and  continued  in  session 
until  about  the  24th  of  April,  1868.  The  Constitution  framed  by 
this  body  provided  for  an  election  to  be  held  on  the  2d  of  June,  1868, 
to  decide  whether  the  Constitution  should  be  "ratified"  or  "re- 
jected," and  at  the  same  time  that  an  election  should  be  held  for 
members  of  the  General  Assembly  and  for  all  State  officers  to  be 
elected  by  the  people  under  the  Constitution. 

It  was  further  provided  "  that  the  returns  of  the  election  shall  be 
made  in  duplicate,  one  copy  to  the  Commanding  General  and  one 
copy  to  the  President  of  this  Convention  (Underwood),  who  shall 
give  certificates  of  election  to  the  persons  elected  "  ! 

Almost  simultaneously  with  the  publication  of  the  Constitution 
and  of  the  election  ordinance  under  it,  a  general  order  was  issued 


50  RESTORATION    OF    VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION. 

from  military  headquarter?  removing  Governor  Pierpoint from  office, 
and  substituting  Mr.  H.  H.  Wells  in  his  place  !  There  was  no 
charge  of  official  misconduct  by  Pierpoint,  and  his  removal  was, 
obviously,  for  political  reasons.  He  was  too  conservative  to  suit  the 
purposes  of  extreme  partisans  ! 

The  Conservatives  of  Virginia,  supposing  that  the  election  would 
be  held  on  the  2d  of  June,  1868,  proceeded  at  once  to  organize  for 
the  contest.  A  convention  of  the  Conservatives  was  held  in  Rich- 
mond on  the  4th  of  May,  1868,  to  nominate  a  State  ticket  to  conduct 
the  canvass  in  opposition  to  the  ratification  of  the  Underwood  Con- 
stitution and  the  election  of  H.  H.  Wells  as  Governor  of  Virginia. 
At  this  convention,  Colonel  R.  E.  Withers  was  nominated  ior  Gov- 
ernor, Hon.  John  L.  Marye  for  Lieutenant-Governor,  and  General 
James  A.  Walker  for  Attorney-General.  These  were  gentlemen  of 
unquestionable  ability  and  character,  and  each  well  qualified  for  the 
high  position  for  which  he  was  nominated.  These  gentlemen  without 
delay  took  the  field  to  canvass  the  State  in  opposition  to  the  ratifica- 
tion of  the  Underwood  Constitution.  Wherever  they  appeared  they 
were  met  by  enthusiastic  crowds. 

At  that  time  (May,  1868,)  neither  the  speakers  nor  the  people  of 
Virginia  could  be  led  to  believe  that  the  intelligent  population  of  the 
North  could  be  persuaded  to  tolerate  universal  suffrage  among  the 
ignorant  negroes  of  the  South.  Hence,  the  disfranchisements  of  the 
whites  and  enfranchisements  of  the  blacks,  proposed  by  the  Under- 
wood Constitution,  became  subjects  of  the  most  unqualified  denun- 
ciations by  the  Conservative  candidates  and  their  advocates.  It  is 
plain  to  see  that  one  of  the  effects  of  this  exciting  popular  canvass 
was  to  stimulate  and  strengthen  the  public  sentiment  in  opposition  to 
negro  suffrage,  and  render  more  difficult  the  task  of  reconciling  the 
public  mind  of  Virginia,  a  year  later,  to  acquiescence  in  it  even  after 
the  announcement  in  the  platform  of  the  Republican  party,  in  the 
summer  of  1868,  of  universal  negro  suffrage  as  one  of  their  cardinal 
doctrines.  The  people  of  Virginia  still  continued  to  hope  against 
hope,  and  it  was  not  until  the  results  of  the  Presidential  and  Con- 
gressional elections  of  1868,  which  turned  on  that  issue,  had  been 
ascertained  that  their  eyes  were  opened  to  the  appalling  and  inevitable 
fact  that  no  reconstruction  of  civil  government  in  the  South  was 
possible  which  did  not  embody  this  hateful  feature  in  it.  No  people 
were  ever  called  on  to  submit  to  a  more  painful  sacrifice  of  feeling  and 
conviction.  But,  like  the  surrender  of  General  Lee  and  his  gallant 
associates  in  arms,  it  was  inevitable.  Our  great  leaders  were  obliged 


RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  51 

to  submit  to  overwhelming-  force  on  the  battlefield.  The  people  of 
the  South,  in  like  manner,  were  constrained  to  surrender  by  an  equally 
disastrous  defeat  in  the  field  of  political  contest !  The  masses  were 
in  no  condition  to  reason  dispassionately.  Indignation  beclouded 
their  judgment.  This  tends  to  explain  why,  at  the  outset,  the  move- 
ment of  the  "  Committee  of  Nine,"  and  the  intelligent  and  patriotic 
citizens  who  co-operated  with  them,  encountered  such  fierce  opposi- 
tion and  reproach  from  a  portion  of  the  public  press  and  some  of 
the  people. 

During  the  pendency  of  the  elections  in  the  North  in  1868,  to 
which  reference  has  been  made,  the  elections  in  Virginia  were  post- 
poned indefinitely  to  await  the  future  action  of  Congress. 

But  the  State  ticket,  which  had  been  nominated  on  the  4th  of  May, 
1868,  eight  months  before,  and  under  circumstances  so  entirely  dif- 
ferent, still  retained  their  position  as  nominees,  and,  it  was  generally 
understood,  that  when  an  election  should  be  ordered,  H.  H.  Wells 
would  be  placed  at  the  head  of  the  opposing  Radical  ticket. 

This  glance  at  the  condition  of  things  that  existed  in  Virginia  at 
the  time  the  "Committee  of  Nine"  were  in  session  in  Washington, 
is  necessary  to  make  the  narrative  of  subsequent  events  intelligible. 

It  has  already  been  stated  that  very  soon  after  the  Committee  of 
Nine  assembled  in  Washington,  two  other  committees,  headed  re- 
spectively by  Mr.  Franklin  Stearns  and  Governor  H.  H.  Wells,  both 
professing  to  be  Republican,  appeared  at  Washington  as  representa- 
tives of  the  party  in  Richmond.  It  soon  became  manifest  that  the 
members  of  the  first  of  these  committees  were  essentially  conserva- 
tive, and  in  large  measure  sympathized  with  the  general  objects  of 
the  Committee  of  Nine.  This  discovery  naturally  broke  down  all 
barriers  between  these  two  committees,  and  thereafter  they  became 
allies,  instead  of  adversaries,  in  the  great  work  of  liberating  Vir- 
ginia. Mr.  George  Rye  also,  who  originally  was  a  member  of  the 
Wells  Committee,  soon  became  satisfied  that  he  occupied  a  false  po- 
sition, and  became  a  zealous  co-worker  with  the  Stearns  Committee, 
and  rendered  valuable  assistance. 

Community  of  purpose  soon  led  to  free  interchange  of  sentiment 
and  opinions,  and  while  there  were  no  formal  interviews  between  the 
two  committees  as  such,  the  individual  members  at  an  early  day 
became  acquainted  with  each  other,  and  discussed,  without  reserve, 
the  best  means  of  promoting  the  objects  they  had  in  view. 

In  these  conferences  the  future  of  Virginia  was  the  subject  of  much 
earnest  and  anxious  conversation,  not  merely  with  reference  to  the 


52  RESTORATION  OF  VIRGINIA  TO  THE    UNION. 

probable  action  of  the  Government  at  Washington,  but  also  as  to  the 
best  policy  to  be  pursued  to  insure  success  in  the  elections  that  must 
soon  be  ordered.  All  recognized  the  fact  that  Wells  had  been  ap- 
pointed military  Governor  with  a  view  to  give  him  prestige  and  pave 
the  way  for  his  nomination  as  Governor  at  the  coming  State  election. 
All  saw  that,  coming  before  the  nominating  convention  under  such 
auspices,  and  backed  by  the  whole  power  of  the  Radical  Republicans, 
Wells  must  prove  a  formidable  candidate.  Finally,  all  feared  that, 
let  the  popular  vote  as  between  Withers,  a  red-handed  Confederate 
colonel,  and  Wells,  a  loyal  Republican,  be  as  it  might,  Wells  would 
be  "counted  in." 

These  matters  were  informally,  but  fully  and  freely  discussed  by 
individual  members  of  the  committees  at  Washington.  It  was  sug- 
gested that  possibly  a  condition  of  things  might  arise,  in  which  the 
conservative  Republicans,  who  were  co-operating  with  Mr.  Stearns, 
might  hold  the  key  to  the  political  position !  It  might  be  found,  on 
consultation,  in  the  event  of  the  nomination  of  Wells,  that  it  would 
be  unwise  for  the  Conservative  party  to  enter  into  the  contest  under 
the  leadership  of  Withers,  and  thereby  encounter  the  double  hazard 
of  his  defeat  by  the  popular  vote,  and  the  still  greater  one  of  his 
being  "  counted  out"  by  the  returning  officers! 

It  was  known  that  the  Republican  Convention  would  be  held  at  an 
early  day,  and  it  was  regarded  as  important  that  the  leading  con- 
servative Republicans  should  be  present  at  that  meeting  and  en- 
deavor to  defeat  the  nomination  of  Wells.  But  if  that  should  be 
found  impracticable,  that  they  should  withdraw  and  nominate  some 
safe  conservative  man,  who  would  honestly  and  fairly  administer  the 
duties  of  the  office.  In  this  connection,  the  names  of  Franklin 
Stearns,  William  L.  Owen,  and  Gilbert  C.  Walker  were  favorably 
mentioned. 

The  primary  object  was  the  defeat  of  Wells— first,  by  preventing 
his  nomination  in  the  Convention,  and  if  that  could  not  be  done, 
then  by  breaking  the  force  of  it  by  the  nomination  of  a  rival  Re- 
publican candidate  of  conservative  principles  by  the  seceding  mem- 
bers of  the  Convention.  By  adopting  this  course,  the  Conservative 
party  would  be  left  free  to  decide,  at  a  later  day,  whether  it  would  be 
best  for  them  to  continue  the  contest,  under  the  lead  of  Withers, 
Marye,  and  Walker,  or  to  withdraw  that  ticket  and  give  their  sup 
port  to  the  candidates  named  by  the  seceders  from  the  Republican 
Convention,  and  thereby  consolidate  all  the  conservative  elements 
in  opposition  to  Wells.  It  is  proper  to  add,  however,  that  while 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE   UNION.  53 

speculative  opinions  like  these  were  freely  expressed,  no  attempt  was 
made  to  formulate  or  agree  to  any  line  of  policy  founded  on  them. 
Every  one  was  left  free  to  pursue  in  the  future  such  course  as  his 
judgment  might  dictate. 

After  a  sojourn  of  ten  days  or  more  in  Washington,  the  members 
of  the  "Committee  of  Nine,"  believing  that  they  had  substantially 
accomplished  the  objects  of  their  mission,  returned  to  their  respective 
homes,  to  await  the  development  of  the  fruits  of  their  labors. 

Important  events  soon  followed  in  rapid  succession.  General 
Grant  was  inaugurated  on  the  4th  of  March,  1869.  The  Republican 
Convention  met  at  Petersburg  on  the  gth  of  the  same  month,  and 
after  a  turbulent  session  of  two  days,  nominated  H.  H.  Wells  for 
Governor,  J.  D.  Harris  (colored)  for  Lieutenant-Governor,  and  T.  M. 
Bowden  for  Attorney- General. 

But  before  these  nominations  were  made,  the  conservative  Repub- 
lican members  of  the  Convention,  finding  themselves  overpowered  by 
a  riotous  mob  of  ignorant  negroes,  led  by  unprincipled  adventurers, 
withdrew  from  the  Convention,  and  in  a  few  days  thereafter,  aided  by 
more  than  one  hundred  respectable  gentlemen  of  both  parties  from 
other  parts  of  the  State,  published  an  address  to  the  people,  nomi- 
nating, in  opposition  to  Wells  and  his  associates,  a  Conservative- 
Republican  ticket,  composed  of  Gilbert  C.  Walker  for  Governor, 
John  F.  Lewis  for  Lieutenant-Governor,  and  James  C.  Taylor  for 
Attorney-General.  This  address  was  signed  by  Franklin  Stearns, 
Horace  L.  Kent,  George  Rye,  John  S.  Develin,  and  about  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  other  gentlemen,  whose  names  were  known  to  the  peo- 
ple of  Virginia  as  men  of  intelligence  and  character,  and  largely  in- 
terested in  the  welfare  of  the  Commonwealth. 

On  the  yth  of  April,  1869,  President  Grant,  in  accordance  with  the 
assurances  he  had  given  to  the  "Committee  of  Nine,"  sent  the  fol- 
lowing, which  was  his  first  message,  to  Congress  : 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  April  ?th,  1869. 
To  the  Senate  and 

House  of  Representatives: 

While  I  am  aware  that  the  time  in  which  Congress-proposes  now  to 
remain  in  session  is  very  brief,  and  that  it  is  its  desire,  so  far  as  is  consistent 
with  the  public  interests,  to  avoid  entering  upon  the  general  business  of 
legislation,  there  is  one  subject  which  concerns  so  deeply  the  welfare  of  the 
country  that  I  deem  it  my  duty  to  bring  it  before  you. 

I  have  no  doubt  that  you  will  concur  with  me  in  my  opinion,  that  it  is 
desirable  to  restore  the  States,  which  were  engaged  in  the  Rebellion,  to  their 
proper  relations  to  the  government  and  the  country  at  as  early  a  period  as 


54  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

the  people  of  those  States  shall  be  found  willing  to  become  peaceful  and 
orderly  communities,  and  to  adopt  and  maintain  such  constitutions  and  laws 
as  will  effectually  secure  the  civil  and  political  rights  of  all  persons  within 
their  borders. 

The  authority  of  the  United  States,  which  has  been  vindicated  and  estab- 
lished by  its  military  power,  must  undoubtedly  be  asserted  for  the  absolute 
protection  of  all  its  citizens  in  the  full  enjoyment  of  the  freedom  and  security, 
which  is  the  object  of  a  republican  government.  But,  whenever  the  people 
of  a  rebellious  State  are  ready  to  enter,  in  good  faith,  upon  the  accomplish- 
ment of  this  object,  in  entire  conformity  with  the  constitutional  authority  of 
Congress,  it  is  certainly  desirable  that  all  causes  of  irritation  should  be  re- 
moved as  promptly  as  possible,  that  a  more  perfect  union  may  be  established 
and  the  country  be  restored  to  peace  and  prosperity. 

The  Convention  of  the  people  of  Virginia,  which  met  in  Richmond  on 
Tuesday,  December  3d,  1867,  framed  a  Constitution  for  that  State,  which  was 
adopted  (endorsed)  by  the  Convention  on  the  iyth  of  April,  1868,  and  I  desire 
respectfully  to  call  the  attention  of  Congress  to  the  propriety  of  providing, 
by  law,  for  the  holding  of  an  election  in  that  State,  at  some  time  during  the 
months  of  May  and  June  next,  under  the  direction  of  the  military  com- 
mander of  the  district,  at  which  the  question  of  the  adoption  of  that  Consti- 
tution shall  be  submitted  to  the  citizens  of  the  State;  and,  if  this  should 
seem  desirable,  I  would  recommend  that  a  separate  vote  be  taken  on  such 
parts  as  may  be  thought  expedient,  and  that,  at  the  same  time  and  under  the 
same  authority,  there  shall  be  an  election  for  the  officers  provided  under 
such  Constitution,  and  that  the  Constitution,  or  such  parts  thereof  as  shall 
have  been  adopted  by  the  people,  be  submitted  to  Congress  on  the  first 
Monday  in  December  next  for  its  consideration,  so  that,  if  the  same  is  then 
approved,  the  necessary  steps  will  have  been  taken  for  the  restoration  of 
the  State  of  Virginia  to  its  proper  relations  to  the  Union. 

I  am  led  to  make  this  recommendation  in  the  confident  hope  and  belief 
that  the  people  of  that  State  are  now  ready  to  co-operate  with  the  National 
Government  in  bringing  it  again  into  such  relations  to  the  Union  as  it  ought, 
as  soon  as  possible,  to  establish  and  maintain,  and  to  give  to  all  its  people 
those  equal  rights,  under  the  law,  which  were  asserted  in  the  Declaration  of 
Independence,  in  the  words  of  one  of  the  most  illustrious  of  its  sons. 

I  desire,  also,  to  ask  the  consideration  of  Congress  to  the  question, 
whether  there  is  not  just  ground  for  believing  that  the  Constitution,  framed 
by  a  convention  of  the  people  of  Mississippi  for  that  State,  and  once  rejected, 
might  not  be  again  submitted  to  the  people  of  that  State  in  like  manner  and 
without  the  probability  of  the  same  result. 

U.  S.  GRANT. 

On  the  loth  of  April,  1869,  Congress  responded  to  this  message 
by  passing  a  bill,  the  following  synopsis  of  which  is  taken  from  the 
Code  of  Virginia  of  1873,  page  26: 

The  Act  prescribed  that  the  President  of  the  United  States  may,  at  such 
time  as  he  may  deem  best,  submit  the  Constitution,  which  was  framed  by  the 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA    TO    THE    UNION.  55 

Convention,  to  the  voters  for  ratification  or  rejection ;  and  may  also  submit 
to  a  separate  vote  such  provisions  of  said  Constitution  as  he  may  deem  best, 
such  vote  to  be  taken,  either  upon  each  of  the  said  provisions  alone,  or  in 
connection  with  the  other  portions,  as  he  may  direct. 

That  at  the  same  time  the  members  of  the  General  Assembly  and  the 
officers  of  the  State  and  members  of  Congress  provided  for  by  the  Consti- 
tution shall  be  elected,  and  the  Commanding  General  for  the  District  of 
Virginia  shall  provide  therefor. 

That  if  the  Constitution  shall  be  Ratified  at  such  election,  the  Legislature 
of  the  State,  elected  as  provided  for,  shall  assemble  in  the  Capitol  of  said 
State  on  the  fourth  Tuesday  after  the  official  promulgation  of  such  ratifica- 
tion by  the  military  officer  commanding  in  the  State. 

That  before  the  State  of  Virginia  shall  be  admitted  to  representation  in 
Congress,  their  several  Legislatures,  which  may  be  hereafter  lawfully  organ- 
ized, shall  ratify  the  Fifteenth  Amendment  proposed  by  Congress  to  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  then  that  all  these  proceedings  shall 
be  approved  by  Congress. 

On  the  1 4th  of  May,  1869,  President  Grant  issued  the  following 
proclamation,  under  the  authority  given  to  him  by  the  Act  of  Con- 
gress approved  April  roth,  1869: 

In  pursuance  of  the  provisions  of  the  Act  of  Congress,  approved  April  10, 
1869, 1  hereby  designate  the  6th  day  of  July,  1869,  as  the  time  for  submitting 
the  Constitution,  passed  by  the  Convention  which  met  in  Richmond,  Virginia, 
on  Tuesday,  the  3d  day  of  December,  1867,  to  the  voters  of  said  State, 
registered  at  the  date  of  such  submission — viz. :  July  6th,  1869 — for  ratification 
or  rejection  ;  and  I  submit,  to  a  separate  vote,  the  fourth  clause  of  section 
i,  Article  III,  of  said  Constitution,  which  is  in  the  following  words : 

"  Every  person  who  has  been  a  Senator  or  Representative  in  Congress,  or 
elector  of  President  or  Vice-President,  or  who  held  any  office,  civil  or  military, 
under  the  United  States,  or  under  any  State,  who,  having  previously  taken 
an  oath  as  a  member  of  Congress,  or  as  an  officer  of  the  United  States,  or 
as  a  member  of  any  State  Legislature,  or  as  an  executive  or  judicial  officer 
of  any  State,  shall  have  engaged  in  insurrection  or  rebellion  against  the 
same,  or  given  aid  or  comfort  to  the  enemies  thereof." 

This  clause  shall  include  the  following  officers :  Governor,  Lieutenant- 
Governor,  Secretary  of  State,  Auditor  of  Public  Accounts,  Second  Auditor, 
Register  of  the  Land  Office,  State  Treasurer,  Attorney-General,  Sheriffs, 
Sergeants  of  a  city  or  town,  Commissioner  of  the  Revenue,  County  Sur- 
veyors, Constables,  Overseers  of  the  Poor,  Commissioner  of  the  Board  of 
Public  Works,  Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court,  Judges  of  the  Circuit  Court, 
Judges  of  the  Court  of  Hustings,  Justices  of  the  County  Courts,  Mayor, 
Recorder,  Alderman,  Councilman  of  a  city  or  town,  Coroners,  Escheators, 
Inspectors  of  Tobacco,  Flour,  etc.,  Clerks  of  the  Supreme,  District,  Circuit 
and  County  Courts,  and  of  the  Court  of  Hustings,  and  Attorneys  for  the 
Commonwealth:  provided,  that  the  Legislature  may,  by  a  vote  of  three- 


56  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE   UNION. 

fifths  of  both  Houses,  remove  the  disabilities  incurred  by  this  clause,  from 
any  person  included  therein,  by  a  separate  vote  in  each  case. 

And  I  also  submit  to  a  separate  vote  section  7  of  Article  III  of  the  said 
Constitution,  which  is  in  the  following  words  : 

"  In  addition  to  the  foregoing  oath  of  office,  the  Governor,  Lieutenant- 
Governor,  members  of  the  General  Assembly,  Secretary  of  State,  Auditor 
of  Public  Accounts,  State  Treasurer,  Attorney-General,  and  all  persons 
elected  to  any  convention  to  frame  a  Constitution  for  this  State,  or  to 
amend  or  revise  this  Constitution  in  ayy  manner,  and  Mayor  and  Coun- 
cil of  any  city  or  town,  shall,  before  they  enter  on  the  duties  of  their 
respective  offices,  take  and  subscribe  the  following  oath  or  affirmation ; 
provided,  the  disabilities  therein  contained  may  be  individually  removed 

by   a    three-fifths   vote    of  the   General   Assembly :    '  I, ,  do 

solemnly  swear  (or  affirm)  that  I  have  never  voluntarily  borne  arms  against 
the  United  States  since  I  have  been  a  citizen  thereof;  that  I  have  volun- 
tarily given  no  aid,  countenance,  counsel,  or  encouragement  to  persons 
engaged  in  armed  hostility  thereto;  that  I  have  never  sought  nor  ac- 
cepted, nor  attempted  to  exercise,  the  functions  of  any  office  whatever 
under  any  authority  or  pretended  authority  in  hostility  to  the  United  States  ; 
that  I  have  not  yielded  a  voluntary  support  to  any  pretended  government, 
authority,  power,  or  constitution  within  the  United  States  hostile  or  inimical 
thereto.  And  I  do  further  swear  (or  affirm)  that,  to  the  best  of  my  know- 
ledge and  ability,  I  will  support  and  defend  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  against  all  enemies,  foreign  and  domestic ;  that  I  will  bear  true  faith 
and  allegiance  to  the  same ;  that  I  take  this  obligation  freely,  without  any 
mental  reservation  or  purpose  of  evasion ;  and  that  I  will  well  and  faithfully 
discharge  the  duties  of  the  office  on  which  I  am  about  to  enter.  So  help 
me  God.'  The  above  oath  shall  also  be  taken  by  all  the  city  and  county 
officers  before  entering  upon  their  duties,  and  by  all  other  State  officers  not 
included  in  the  above  provision." 

I  direct  the  vote  to  be  taken  upon  each  of  the  above-cited  provisions 
alone,  and  upon  the  other  portions  of  the  said  Constitution  in  the  following 
manner,  viz.,  each  voter  favoring  the  ratification  of  the  Constitution,  exclud- 
ing the  provisions  above  quoted,  as  framed  by  the  Convention  of  December 
3d,  1867,  shall  express  his  judgment  by  voting  for  the  Constitution.  Each 
voter  favoring  the  rejection  of  the  Constitution,  excluding  the  provisions 
above  quoted,  shall  express  his  judgment  by  voting  against  the  Constitution. 
Each  voter  will  be  allowed  to  cast  a  separate  ballot  for  or  against  either  «r 
both  of  the  provisions  above  quoted. 

In  testimony  whereof,  I  have  hereunto  set  my  hand  and  caused  the  seal  of 
the  United  States  to  be  affixed. 

Done  at  the  city  of  Washington  this  i4th  day  of  May,  in  the  year  of  our 
Lord  1869,  and  of  the  Independence  of  the  United  States  of  America  the 
ninety-third. 

U.  S.  GRANT. 

By  the  President : 

HAMILTON  FISH,  Secretary  of  State. 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  57 

It  will  be  seen  that  this  proclamation  restricted  the  separate  votes 
to  be  taken  to  the  two  clauses  which  imposed  test-oaths  and  disfran- 
chisements,  thus  denying  the  right  to  a  separate  vote  on  the  "  county- 
organization,"  which  he  had,  in  the  presence  of  the  "Committee  of 
Nine,"  emphatically  denounced  as  the  worst  feature  of  the  Consti- 
tution ! 

This  singular  and  unexpected  omission  caused  great  surprise  and 
a  good  deal  of  indignation,  at  the  time,  among  the  people  of  Virginia. 
The  public  press  had  made  known  to  them  the  substance  of  what 
General  Grant  had  said  to  the  "Committee  of  Nine"  in  regard  to 
this  particular  feature  of  the  Constitution,  and  of  the  mischievous 
consequences  which  must  inevitably  follow  its  adoption.  In  the 
absence  of  all  explanation,  some  were  disposed  to  impute  bad  faith 
to  President  Grant.  I  did  not  concur  in  this  view  of  the  subject. 
I  felt  sure  there  must  be  some  strong  reason  (which  it  would  not  be 
prudent  to  disclose  at  the  time)  which  had  constrained  General  Grant 
to  forbear  from  including  this  clause  among  those  upon  which  separate 
votes  were  to  be  taken. 

And  here,  injustice  to  General  Grant's  memory,  it  is  proper  that  I 
should  say  that,  at  a  later  day,  I  learned  from  an  unquestionable 
source  that  I  was  right  in  my  conjecture. 

The  question,  as  to  what  clauses  should  be  voted  on  separately,  was 
the  subject  of  consideration  in  the  Cabinet.  There  was  little,  if  any, 
difference  of  opinion  about  the  "test-oath"  and  the  "  disfranchise- 
ment"  clauses.  But  when  the  "county-organization"  clause  came 
up,  much  diversity  of  thought  developed  itself.  General  Grant  was 
earnestly  in  favor  of  submitting  it  separately,  but  a  majority  of  the 
Cabinet  had  been  led  to  believe  that  the  secret  but  controlling  reason 
why  the  people  of  Virginia  wished  to  strike  out  that  feature,  was  to 
rid  themselves  of  the  obligation  to  establish  a  system  of  free  schools, 
with  which  it  was  so  intimately  blended.  This  view  of  the  subject 
was  pressed  with  so  much  warmth  and  earnestness  that,  although 
General  Grant  did  not  believe  it  to  be  true,  he  found  himself  obliged, 
for  the  sake  of  harmony  in  his  Cabinet,  to  yield  the  point. 

The  President's  proclamation  became  the  subject  of  excited  dis- 
cussion in  the  newspapers  and  on  the  street  corners  and  at  every 
place  where  half  a  dozen  people  met  together.  The  disappointment 
was  keenly  felt,  and  the  enquiry  was  on  the  lips  of  every  intelligent 
man,  "  What  shall  we  do?"  This  condition  of  things  existed,  not 
only  among  the  younger  and  more  impetuous  classes  ;  it  prevailed, 
to  a  great  extent,  among  the  most  judicious  and  thoughtful  men  of 


58  RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

the  State.     In  a  word,  the  public  mind  was  unsettled  as  to  what  was 
the  wisest  course  to  pursue. 

As  an  illustration  of  the  condition  of  things  which  then  existed,  I 
will  refer  to  an  incident  within  my  own  knowledge. 

Business  required  my  presence  in  Charlottesville,  for  a  few  days, 
about  the  time  of  the  issue  of  the  President's  proclamation.  As  I 
walked  from  the  courthouse  to  the  railroad  depot,  where  I  was  to 
take  the  cars  on  my  return  to  my  home  in  Staunton,  I  casually  fell 
in  company  with  an  old  and  valued  friend,  Professor  John  B.  Minor, 
one  of  the  most  honored  professors  of  the  University  of  Virginia, 
who  was  also  about  to  take  the  cars  as  far  as  the  University  of  Virginia. 
The  President's  proclamation  naturally  became  the  subject  of  dis- 
cussion. He  inclined  to  the  opinion  that  it  would  be  best  for  the 
people  of  Virginia  to  vote  down  the  Underwood  Constitution,  and 
said  that  such  seemed  to  be  the  sentiment  of  his  brother  professors. 
I  differed  with  him,  and  we  discussed  the  question  until  we  arrived 
at  the  University  station,  where  the  train  then  stopped  for  a  few 
moments.  As  he  was  about  leaving  the  train,  he  said  to  me  he  had 
been  impressed  with  some  of  the  views  I  had  presented,  and  begged 
me,  when  I  arrived  at  home,  to  write  him  a  letter,  giving  more  full 
expression  to  them,  which  I  promised  to  do. 

On  the  following  day  I  wrote  a  letter  to  him,  giving  my  opinion  in 
regard  to  the  proper  policy  to  be  pursued  by  the  people  of  Virginia, 
and  some  of  the  most  urgent  reasons  in  support  of  it.  This  letter 
was  not  written  with  any  view  to  its  publication.  But,  in  a  day  or 
two  afterwards,  I  received  a  note  from  Professor  Minor,  thanking  me 
for  the  letter,  and  stating,  that  as  it  had  aided  him  and  some  of  his 
co-professors  in  coming  to  a  right  conclusion  on  the  subject,  he 
thought  it  might  possibly  render  a  similar  service  to  others,  and  he 
had,  therefore,  taken  the  liberty,  without  asking  my  consent,  to  send 
it  to  the  Richmond  Enquirer  for  publication.  It  was,  accordingly, 
published  in  the  Enquirer,  and  thence  re-published  in  many  other 
papers.  The  following  is  a  copy  of  it : 

LETTER   ADDRESSED    BY  HON.   ALEXANDER    H.    H.    STUART   TO    PRO- 
FESSOR  JOHN    B.   MINOR. 

STAUNTON,  May  2jth,  i86g. 
My  Dear  Sir: 

When  I  casually  met  you  a  few  days  ago,  you  requested  that 
I  would  express  to  you,  in  writing,  my  views  of  the  course  the  people  of 
Virginia  should  pursue  in  regard  to  the  questions  about  to  be  submitted  for 
their  decision  under  the  President's  proclamation.  I  now  proceed  to  do  so. 


RESTORATION    OF    VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION.  59 

There  certainly  was  much  disappointment  felt  when  it  was  ascertained  that 
the  President  had  failed  to  include  the  "county  organization  "  clauses  of  the 
Constitution  among  those  which  were  to  be  submitted  to  the  people  to  be 
voted  on  separately.  It  was  known  that  the  President  had  expressed  strong 
opposition  to  these  clauses,  as  tending  to  segregate  the  white  and  colored 
population  by  a  geographical  line,  and  to  impair  the  productive  power  of  the 
State,  by  separating  the  labor  of  the  country  from  the  capital  of  the  Com- 
monwealth. Hence  a  confident  expectation  was  entertained  that  he  would 
afford  to  the  people  an  opportunity  of  striking  these  objectionable  features 
from  the  proposed  Constitution.  In  the  first  excitement  occasioned  by  this 
disappointment,  some  persons  expressed  their  purpose  to  try  and  defeat 
the  whole  instrument,  by  voting,  first,  to  strike  out  the  disfranchising  clauses 
and  the  test-oath,  and  then  against  the  instrument  thus  expurgated.  This 
disposition  was  not  unnatural  under  the  circumstances.  Within  the  four 
years  which  have  elapsed  since  the  close  of  the  war  the  people  of  Virginia 
have  been  subjected  to  so  much  disappointment,  annoyance,  and  obloquy, 
that  they  have  become  sensitive  and  in  some  degree  soured. 

But,  unfortunately,  we  are  in  no  condition  now  to  take  counsel  of  our 
wishes.  We  are  not  in  that  happy  state  in  which  we  can  afford  to 
indulge  in  the  luxury  of  a  little  ill-temper.  We  are  bound  by  inexorable 
necessity  to  confront  the  stern  realities  of  our  situation,  and  to  make  the 
best  we  can  of  them.  After  giving  to  the  subject  the  best  consideration,  I 
have  satisfied  myself  that  it  is  the  true  policy  of  the  people  of  Virginia  to 
vote  to  strike  out  the  test-oath  and  disfranchising  clauses,  and  then  to  vote 
for  the  adoption  of  the  residue  of  the  Constitution.  I  admit  that  it  is  a 
painful  necessity,  yet  it  is  not  the  less  a  necessity. 

It  is  true  that  we  will  not  get  all  that  we  had  expected  to  get,  yet  I  think 
it  is  obvious  that  by  so  doing  we  gain  a  great  deal.  The  Constitution,  even 
when  expurgated,  will  be  a  very  objectionable  instrument,  but  it  is  certainly 
much  better  than  in  its  original  form,  and,  in  my  judgment,  it  is  infinitely 
preferable  to  no  Constitution  at  all.  We  can  at  least  live  under  it  for  a  time, 
with  the  certain  assurance  that  after  awhile  we  can  greatly  improve  it.  It 
would  tax  my  time  and  your  patience  too  largely  to  give  all  the  reasons 
which  have  brought  my  mind  to  this  conclusion.  But  I  will  state  one  or 
two  of  the  most  prominent :  It  seems  to  me  that  in  casting  their  votes  under 
the  President's  proclamation,  the  people  are  called  on  to  decide  where  the 
political  power  of  the  State  is  to  rest  hereafter,  and  who  are  to  control  her 
destinies  in  the  future.  They  will  have  to  elect  between  three  competing 
propositions,  neither  of  which  is  entirely  acceptable,  but  there  is  no  other 
open  to  us.  These  propositions  are:  ist.  To  take  the  Underwood  Consti- 
tution pure  and  simple ;  2d.  To  vote  the  whole  Constitution  down;  3d.  To 
adopt  it,  with  the  disfranchisement  and  test-oath  stricken  out.  Let  us  now 
consider  what  is  the  practical  bearing  and  effect  of  each  one  of  these  propo- 
sitions. Let  us  see  how  it  will  affect  the  future  status  of  the  political  power 
of  the  Commonwealth. 

If  we  allow  the  Underwood  Constitution  to  be  adopted,  with  all  of  its 
disqualifications,  it  is  obvious  that  we  voluntarily  disfranchise  ourselves  for 
a  generation  to  come,  and  place  the  political  power — the  power  to  control 


60  RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

our  lives,  liberty,  and  property— in  the  hands  of  the  carpet-baggers  and  the 
worst  classes  of  our  own  people.  I  presume  there  are  few  intelligent  and 
upright  men  in  the  State  who  will  favor  this  proposition,  and  I,  therefore, 
pass  it  by  without  further  commentary.  Let  us  now  consider  the  second. 
Suppose  we  vote  the  whole  Constitution  down,  what  follows  ?  Some  con- 
tend that  matters  would  stand  as  they  are.  Assuming  such  to  be  the  fact,  I 
ask  is  that  not  bad  enough  ?  We  would  have  Wells  for  our  nominal  Gov- 
ernor, and  all  of  our  offices  filled  by  aliens  and  strangers.  We  would  have 
justice  administered  under  military  supervision  and  by  appointees  of  a  military 
commandant.  But  what  assurance  have  we  that  matters  would  remain  as 
they  are  ?  How  do  we  know  whether  our  situation  will  not  be  rendered 
more  intolerable  than  it  is  now  ?  By  voting  down  the  Constitution  alto- 
gether, we,  in  effect,  recommit  the  whole  political  power  of  the  State  to  a 
.  Radical  Congress.  Has  the  past  action  of  that  body  been  such  as  to  render 
it  desirable  that  they  should  again  assume  unlimited  control  over  our  des- 
tiny ?  I  must  acknowledge  I  think  not.  If  we  virtually  decide  that  we  will 
have  nothing  to  do  with  shaping  our  fortunes,  we  compel  Congress  to  take 
upon  itself  that  office.  The  third  proposition  is,  then,  the  only  one  that 
offers  any  hope  of  escape  from  the  terrible  evils  by  which  we  are  threat- 
ened. If  we  strike  out  the  restrictive  features,  and  then  adopt  the  residue 
of  the  instrument,  while  we  do  not  gain  all  we  want,  we  at  least  place  the 
political  power  of  the  State  in  the  hands  of  the  better  classes  of  the  people 
of  Virginia.  We  snatch  it  from  the  grasp  of  the  carpet-baggers  and  their 
allies,  and  we  withdraw  it  from  the  control  of  a  Radical  Congress.  We  will 
entitle  ourselves  to  a  restoration  to  our  rights  in  the  Union,  and  to  the 
withdrawal  of  military  supervision  and  control  over  us.  We  can  elect 
officers  and  enact  laws  of  our  own,  and  within  a  year  or  two,  after  the  excite- 
ment incident  to  these  political  struggles  shall  have  passed  away,  we  can 
call  a  new  Convention  and  form  a  new  Constitution  adapted  to  our  existing 
condition.  By  striking  out  the  disfranchisements  and  test-oaths,  almost  the 
whole  body  of  our  population  will  be  clothed  with  the  power  to  vote  and  be 
rendered  eligible  to  office.  The  principle  of  popular  sovereignty  will  be 
established  on  a  firm  basis,  and  the  voice  of  our  own  citizens  will  be  poten- 
tial in  framing  our  future  organic  law  and  shaping  our  future  policy. 

I  have  thus  stated,  I  think,  fairly  the  three  propositions  between  which  the 
people  of  Virginia  are  compelled  to  choose  If  there  be  any  other  open  to 
them  I  am  not  aware  of  it.  Ought  the  people  of  Virginia  to  hesitate 
between  them  ?  I  think  not.  I  think  they  ought  to  expurgate  the  Constitu- 
tion and  then  adopt  it.  But  it  is  all-important  that  we  should  spare  no 
pains  to  secure  a  good  Legislature  and  a  good  Governor.  The  reasons  are 
too  obvious  to  require  enumeration.  They  will  readily  suggest  themselves 
to  every  intelligent  mind.  If  we  expect  good  laws,  we  must  elect  a  good 
Legislature  If  we  desire  and  wish  an  honest  execution  of  the  laws,  we 
must  choose  a  wise  and  honest  Governor.  And  while  this  is  at  all  times 
necessary,  it  is  especially  so  now.  The  new  Legislature  will  have  to  enact 
all  laws  necessary  to  put  the  new  government  into  operation.  The  Consti- 
tution is  not  self-enforcing ;  it  requires  legislation  to  give  effect  to  it.  The 
new  Governor  will  be  clothed  with  the  veto  power  to  check  hasty  and  im- 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  61 

provident  legislation.  Need  I  say  anything  to  show  to  the  people  the  neces- 
sity of  making  a  wise  selection  of  those  who  are  to  wield  powers,  fraught 
with  so  much  of  weal  or  woe  to  the  State  ? 

Very  truly  yours,  etc., 

ALEX.  H.  H.  STUART. 

But,  resuming  the  narrative  of  events  in  their  chronological  order, 
it  will  be  observed  that  the  withdrawal  of  the  anti-Wells  wing  of  the 
Republican  party  from  the  Convention  of  the  party  at  Petersburg, 
and  their  subsequent  nomination  of  a  State  ticket  of  Conservative- 
Republicans,  put  a  new  face  on  the  condition  of  public  affairs.  There 
were  now  three  distinct  State  tickets  in  the  field.  First,  the  Withers 
ticket,  which  represented  the  Conservative  party,  which  was  opposed 
to  the  general  policy  of  the  Republican  party  and  to  the  Underwood 
Constitution  ;  second,  the  Wells  ticket,  which  was  in  favor  of  the 
harshest  policy  of  the  Republican  party  and  of  the  Underwood  Con- 
stitution just  as  it  came  from  the  hands  of  the  Convention,  without 
any  amendment ;  and,  third,  the  Walker  ticket,  which,  while  on  national 
questions  it  agreed  with  the  conservative  branch  of  the  Republican 
party,  was  earnestly  and  inflexibly  opposed  to  the  adoption  of  the 
Underwood  Constitution,  unless  some  of  its  most  objectionable  fea- 
tures were  stricken  out.  The  contest,  therefore,  seemed  as  if  it 
would  assume  a  tripartite  character,  involving  so  many  and  such 
complicated  questions  as  to  render  it  difficult  for  the  masses  of  the 
people  to  know  what  to  think  or  how  to  act  ! 

Under  these  circumstances,  the  executive  committee,  which  had 
been  appointed  by  the  popular  Convention  of  May  4th,  1868  (which 
had  nominated  Withers  and  his  associates),  deemed  it  wise  to  call  a 
new  Convention,  to  meet  in  Richmond  on  the  28th  April,  1869,  to 
consider  and  decide  what  course  it  would  be  best  to  pursue,  under 
the  new  condition  of  affairs,  to  enable  all  opponents  of  the  unmodi- 
fied Underwood  Constitution,  without  sacrifice  of  principle,  to  act  in 
harmony. 

The  Convention  accordingly  assembled  in  Richmond  on  the  28th 
April,  1869,  and  immediately  after  its  organization,  Messrs.  Withers, 
Marye  and  Walker,  with  a  view  to  relieve  the  Convention  from  any 
embarrassment  arising  out  of  their  nominations,  made  by  the  Con- 
vention of  4th  of  May,  1868,  patriotically  resigned  their  respective 
claims  to  said  nominations.  The  Convention  was  thus  left  free  to  act, 
as  if  no  such  nominations  had  ever  been  made,  and  with  an  eye  single 
to  what  was  best  for  the  safety  and  welfare  of  the  State,  under  exist- 
ing circumstances. 


62  RESTORATION    OF    VIRGINIA    TO    THE    UNION. 

The  whole  subject,  in  all  its  aspects,  was  fully  and  ably  discussed 
by  gentlemen  whose  names  and  public  services  gave  ample  assurance 
of  their  patriotic  purposes  ;  and,  after  mature  deliberation,  the  con- 
vention finally  decided — 

ist.  That  the  resignations  of  Messrs.  Withers,  Marye  and  Walker 
be  accepted. 

ad.  That  it  was  not  expedient  to  make  any  nominations  to  fill  their 
places  ;  but,  "  while  expressing  its  hostility  to  the  leading  and  general 
features  of  the  Constitution,  and  recognizing  the  necessity  of  organi- 
zation for  the  purpose  of  defeating  such  provisions  as  may  be  sub- 
mitted separately,"  declined  to  make  any  recommendation  to  the 
Conservative  voters  of  the  State  as  to  their  suffrages  upon  the  Con- 
stitution, expurgated  of  said  provisions,  or  as  to  the  candidates  that 
may  be  before  the  people,  feeling  well  assured  that  their  own  good 
sense  and  patriotism  will  lead  them  to  such  results  as  will  best  sub- 
serve the  true  and  substantial  interests  of  the  Commonwealth." 

These  resolutions  were  adopted  on  28th  April,  1869,  two  weeks 
before  it  was  known  what  provisions  of  the  Constitution  would  be 
submitted  for  separate  votes.  The  proclamation  of  President  Grant, 
indicating  them,  was  not  issued  until  i4th  May,  1869. 

The  practical  effect  of  the  action  of  the  Convention  was,  to  leave 
but  two  State  tickets  in  the  field,  and  to  narro\v  and  simplify  the  issue 
to  be  decided  by  the  people  to  a  choice  between  Wells  &  Co.  and 
the  original  Underwood  Constitution,  on  the  one  hand,  or  Walker 
and  his  associates  and  the  Constitution,  stripped  of  its  most  objec- 
tionable features,  on  the  other. 

This  action  of  the  Convention  was  hailed  with  great  enthusiasm 
by  the  people  of  Virginia,  as  it  gave  them  almost  certain  assurance 
of  relief  from  the  horrors  of  the  Underwood  Constitution  and  the 
domination  of  Wells ! 

Both  parties  immediately  set  to  work  to  organize  for  the  contest, 
by  selecting  candidates  for  the  Senate  and  House  of  Delegates  and 
all  other  offices  which  were  to  be  filled  at  the  coming  election  ;  and 
notwithstanding  the  disappointment  caused  by  the  failure  of  Presi- 
dent Grant  in  his  proclamation  to  allow  separate  votes  in  regard  to 
other  objectionable  features  of  the  Constitution,  there  was  little,  if 
any,  relaxation  in  the  effort  to  arouse  the  people  to  a  proper  sense  of 
the  dangers  which  threatened  them,  and  to  stimulate  them  to  vigor- 
ous efforts  to  ward  them  off. 

The  canvass  was  prosecuted  with  great  spirit.  The  candidates 
entered  the  field  in  person,  and  traversed  the  State,  making  speeches 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION.-  63 

to  the  crowds  assembled  at  the  court-houses  and  other  public  places. 
Gilbert  C.  Walker,  being  a  man  of  imposing  appearance  and  a  good 
speaker,  and  being  introduced  and  endorsed  by  Conservative  gentle- 
men, was  received  with  enthusiasm  as  the  champion  of  the  rights  of 
the  people.  From  these  exhibitions  of  public  opinion  it  seemed 
manifest  that  the  combined  Conservative  party  would  certainly 
achieve  a  brilliant  victory,  unless  some  unexpected  obstacle  should 
be  interposed  by  Federal  authority  to  impede  its  onward  progress. 

Thus  matters  stood  until  about  the  2Oth  of  June,  1869.  On  that 
day  I  received  a  telegram  from  Mr.  Raleigh  T.  Daniel  and  Messrs. 
Branch  and  Fisher,  his  associates  on  the  Executive  Committee, 
urging  me  to  come  to  Richmond  as  promptly  as  possible  on  business 
of  an  urgent  character  I  replied  to  this  communication  that  I  would 
go  to  Richmond  the  next  day,  and  could  be  found  at  the  residence 
of  Dr.  Hunter  McGuire,  who  then  lived  diagonally  across  Broad 
street  from  Ford's  Hotel.  I  accordingly  went  to  Richmond,  and 
within  a  few  minutes  after  my  arrival  at  Dr.  McGuire' s,  the  gentlemen 
above  named  called  on  me  and  explained  the  objects  of  their  sum- 
mons. They  said  they  had  learned  from  an  authentic  source  that 
General  Canby,  then  in  command  of  the  United  States  troops  at 
Richmond,  had  expressed  the  opinion  that  under  the  terms  of  the 
Reconstruction  acts  it  would  become  his  duty  to  prevent  any  member- 
elect  of  the  Legislature  from  taking  his  seat  unless  he  would  take  the 
oath  prescribed  by  the  act  of  July  2d,  1862,  commonly  called  the 
"  iron-clad  oath"  and  that  he  proposed  to  issue  a  military  order  to 
that  effect .' 

It  was  obvious  that  the  results  of  such  a  measure  would  be  dis- 
astrous to  the  interests  of  the  Conservative  party,  in  destroying  con- 
fidence and  unseating  a  large  number  of  the  members  who  would 
probably  be  elected  to  the  Legislature.  It  might  also  tend  to  arouse 
a  feeling  of  indignation  among  the  people,  that  might  endanger  the 
success  of  the  Conservative  ticket  and  defeat  the  expurgation  and 
ratification  of  the  Constitution. 

The  object  of  the  gentlemen  in  summoning  me  to  Richmond  was 
to  confer  with  me  as  to  the  best  means  of  defeating  the  plans  of 
General  Canby,  and  to  invite  me  to  render  such  assistance  as  I  could 
in  accomplishing  that  object. 

I  remained  the  following  day  in  Richmond  in  conference  with  the 
committee,  and  after  obtaining  a  copy  of  General  Grant's  telegram 
to  General  Meade,  commander  of  the  troops  in  Georgia,  dated  ad 
March,  1868,  I  told  them  I  could  not  see  that  I  could  render  any 


64  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

service  by  remaining  longer,  but  would  return  home  and  endeavor  to 
devise  some  means  of  extricating  the  State  from  the  dangers  which 
threatened  her.  Accordingly  I  came  home  the  following  day. 

On  my  return,  after  careful  consideration,  I  prepared  the  following 
letter  to  General  Grant  : 

STAUNTON,/»«£  251/1,  1869. 

To  His  Excellency, 

the  President  of  the  United  States  : 

SIR, — I  respectfully  beg  leave  to  bring  to  your  notice  a  matter  which 
deeply  affects  the  people  of  Virginia,  and  which,  in  my  judgment,  calls  for 
Executive  interposition. 

You  are  doubtless  aware  of  the  fact  that  the  6th  day  of  July  has  been 
named  as  the  day  for  the  election  of  State  officers  under  the  new  Constitu- 
tion, which  is  submitted,  at  the  same  time,  for  ratification  or  rejection,  under 
the  terms  of  the  Reconstruction  acts  of  Congress,  and  your  orders  made  in 
pursuance  thereof. 

The  people  of  Virginia,  recognizing  the  considerate  regard  which  you 
have  displayed  for  their  interests  and  feelings,  in  affording  them  the  oppor- 
tunity of  expurgating  the  proposed  Constitution  of  two  of  its  most  obnoxious 
features,  have  determined,  in  good  faith,  to  accept  the  residue  of  the  Con- 
stitution and,  in  all  respects,  to  comply  with  the  terms  prescribed  by  the  acts 
of  Congress  and  your  proclamation. 

With  this  view,  they  have  proceeded  to  make  nominations  of  a  State 
ticket  and  members  of  the  Legislature,  taking  care,  in  all  cases,  to  nominate 
none  who  were  ineligible  under  the  provisions  of  the  Fourteenth  Amendment 
of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

Within  a  few  days  past,  however,  a  rumor  has  become  prevalent,  which 
I  have  reason  to  believe  well  founded,  that  General  Canby,  the  military 
commander  of  Virginia,  has  expressed  the  opinion  that,  under  the  terms  of 
the  Reconstruction  acts,  it  would  become  his  duty  to  prevent  any  member 
elect  of  the  Legislature  from  taking  his  seat,  unless  he  would  take  the  oath 
prescribed  by  the  act  of  July  ad,  1862,  commonly  called  the  "  iron-clad '' 
oath. 

While  no  one  questions  the  good  faith  and  upright  purposes  of  General 
Canby,  I  am  persuaded  that  he  has  placed  an  erroneous  construction  on  the 
9th  clause  of  the  act  of  July  igth,  1867. 

In  this  position  I  am  sustained  by  very  high  judicial  authority,  to  whom, 
within  a  few  days  past,  the  question  has  been  informally  submitted,  and  also, 
as  I  believe,  by  your  telegram  to  General  Meade,  on  zd  March,  1868,  in  re- 
gard to  the  officers  elected,  under  similar  circumstances,  in  Georgia.  That 
telegram  is  in  the  following  words:  "The  officers  elected  under  the  new 
Constitution  of  Georgia  are  not  officers  of  the  provisional  government 
referred  to  in  the  Reconstruction  acts,  nor  are  they  officers  elected  under 
any  so-called  State  authority,  and  are  not,  therefore,  required  to  take  the 
oath  prescribed  in  section  9,  act  of  July  19,  1867.  The  eligibility  to  hold 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE   UNION.  65 

office  must  be  determined  by  the  new  Constitution  and  the  amendment  to 
the  United  States  Constitution,  designated  as  Article  XIV." 

The  language  of  the  gth  section  of  the  act  of  July  igth,  1867,  is,  I  believe, 
substantially  as  follows:  "That  all  members  of  said  boards  of  registration 
and  all  persons  hereafter  elected  or  appointed  under  any  so-called  State  or 
municipal  authority,  or  by  detail  or  appointment  of  the  district  commander, 
shall  be  required  to  take  and  to  subscribe  the  oath  of  office  prescribed  by  law 
for  officers  of  the  United  States." 

I  respectfully  submit  that  this  act  of  Congress  refers  to  the  existing  gov- 
ernment of  the  State  of  Virginia,  which  exists  only  by  sufferance  and  is 
properly  styled  a  "so-called  government."  In  the  contemplation  of  Con- 
gress, it  is  a  government  not  lawfully  established,  and  in  no  sense  a  govern- 
ment de  jure.  It  is  simply  a  temporary,  provisional  and  "so  called" 
government. 

But  I  respectfully  submit,  with  equal  confidence,  that  the  new  government, 
now  in  process  of  establishment  in  Virginia  under  the  direct  authority  of 
Congress,  i?  in  nowise  a  "  so-called  "  government,  but,  at  each  step  of  its 
progress,  is  a  lawful,  de  jure  government,  and  that  the  reservation  of  power 
by  Congress  to  examine  and  approve  the  Constitution,  does  not  make  it 
either  a  provisional  or  "so-called"  government. 

In  support  of  this  position,  I  respectfully  refer  to  the  fact  that  Congress 
obviously  contemplated  action  by  the  Legislature,  so  elected,  on  the  pro- 
posed Fifteenth  Amendment  of  the  Constitution.  It  can  hardly  be  supposed 
that  Congress  would  authorize  the  Legislature  of  a  mere  "  so-called  "  gov- 
ernment to  exercise  one  of  the  highest  functions  of  a  de  jure  government, 
viz. :  to  vote  for  or  against  an  amendment  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States. 

I  also  respectfully  refer  to  the  6th  section  of  the  act  of  Congress  under 
which  the  election  in  Virginia  is  about  to  be  held.  That  section  provides 
"That  in  either  of  said  States,  the  commanding  general,  subject  to  the 
approval  of  the  President  of  the  United  States,  may  suspend,  until  the  action 
of  the  Legislatures  elected  under  their  Constitutions,  respectively,  all  laws 
that  he  may  deem  unjust  and  oppressive  to  the  people." 

Here  it  will  be  seen  that  the  power  to  suspend  injurious  laws  is  expressly 
limited  "until  the  action  of  the  Legislatures  elected  under  their  Constitu- 
tions, respectively." 

Why  is  this  dispensing  power  given  at  all,  and  why  is  it  subjected  to  the 
limitation  imposed  1  Clearly  it  is  given  because  the  present  government 
is  a  mere  "so-called"  government,  whose  action  is  subordinate  to  military 
authority,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  limited,  because  the  Legislature 
elected  under  the  new  Constitution  is  a  Legislature  recognized  as  de  jure 
and  competent  to  enact  the  laws  necessary  for  the  welfare  of  the  people. 
When  that  Legislature  meets,  the  suspending  power  of  the  military  com- 
mander ceases.  The  civil  power  is  re-established  on  a  lawful  basis,  which 
is  recognized  by  Congress,  in  advance,  as  superseding  the  necessity  for  mili- 
tary intervention. 

I  would  further  respectfully  suggest  that  the  interpretation  given  by  Gene- 


66  RESTORATION    OF   VIRGINIA   TO    THE    UNION. 

ral  Canby  to  the  acts  of  Congress  is  directly  at  variance  with  the  policy 
recommended  by  the  Executive,  sanctioned  by  Congress,  and  which  is  now 
being  carried  out  under  your  proclamation,  directing  separate  votes  to  be 
taken  on  the  test-oath  and  disfranchising  clauses  of  the  Constitution. 

It  was  obviously  the  purpose  of  Congress  and  the  Executive  to  afford  to 
the  people  of  Virginia  an  opportunity  of  excluding  those  objectionable  fea- 
tures from  the  Constitution.  But,  assuming  General  Canby's  construction 
to  be  correct,  of  what  avail  would  a  unanimous  vote  to  exclude  those 
clauses  be,  if,  in  spite  of  such  vote,  the  very  test-oaths  and  disfranchise  - 
ments  thus  stricken  from  the  instrument  shall  be  applied  to  all  officers 
elected  under  the  expurgated  Constitution?  The  practical  result  would  be 
that,  while  these  objectionable  clauses  would  be  stricken  out  by  the  vote  of 
the  people  on  the  6th  of  July,  they  would  be  reinstated  by  military  authority, 
on  the  assembling  of  the  Legislature,  four  weeks  after  the  adoption  of  the 
Constitution. 

I  respectfully  submit  that  no  such  condition  of  things  could  have  been 
contemplated  either  by  Congress  or  the  Executive. 

I  need  hardly  add  anything  in  regard  to  the  inexpediency  of  the  course 
which  seems  to  be  contemplated  by  General  Canby.  The  people  of  Vir- 
ginia are  sincerely  desirous  of  seeing  harmony  and  good  feeling  restored. 
They  have  surrendered  many  cherished  convictions  to  secure  this  result. 
But  now,  when  we  are  on  the  eve  of  its  accomplishment,  a  new  and  fearful 
element  of  discord  and  ill-feeling  is  about  being  introduced,  which,  if  per- 
sisted in,  will  entail  lasting  evils  on  our  country. 

For  these  and  other  reasons,  which  I  will  not  trouble  you  by  stating  in 
detail,  I  now  most  respectfully,  on  behalf  of  the  people  of  Virginia,  request 
that  you  will  cause  such  instructions  to  be  given  to  General  Canby  as  may 
lead  him  to  conform  his  action  to  your  telegram  to  General  Meade,  above 
quoted,  and  thus  avert  the  mischiefs  which  would  otherwise  result  to  the 
State  of  Virginia. 

Having  for  the  last  six  months  used  every  effort  in  my  power  to  secure 
the  restoration  of  my  native  State  to  her  proper  relations  to  the  Federal 
Government,  I  have  felt  it  to  be  a  solemn  duty  to  make  this  appeal  to  you 
to  so  exercise  the  prerogative  of  your  high  office  as  to  secure  the  prompt 
accomplishment  of  that  most  desirable  result. 

Very  respectfully,  your  obedient  servant, 

ALEX.  H.  H.  STUART. 

After  the  letter  had  been  written  and  a  fair  copy  made,  by  a  confi- 
dential friend,  many  difficulties  presented  themselves  as  to  the  best 
means  of  ensuring  its  safe  delivery  to  President  Grant.  I  felt  that  if 
I  entrusted  it  to  the  mail,  it  was  very  doubtful  whether  General 
Grant  would  ever  see  or  hear  of  it.  While  my  thoughts  were  thus 
occupied,  I  fortunately  saw  my  old  and  valued  friend,  Hon.  John  F. 
Lewis,  passing  my  office.  I  immediately  invited  him  in  and  explained 
to  him  the  object  of  my  recent  visit  to  Richmond  and  the  danger  by 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA    TO   THE    UNION..  67 

which  we  were  threatened.  I  also  read  to  him  the  letter  to  Grant, 
which  I  had  prepared  and  explained  to  him  the  necessity  of  hav- 
ing it  promptly  and  safely  delivered  into  the  President's  own  hands, 
and  proposed,  that  as  he  was  a  personal  and  political  friend  of  the 
President  and  could  readily  gain  access  to  him,  he  should  go  to 
Washington  and  deliver  the  letter.  This  he  readily  agreed  to  do.  I 
then  placed  the  fair  copy  of  the  letter  in  an  unsealed  envelope,  and 
after  directing  it  to  President  Grant,  I  suggested  that  it  would  be 
well  for  him,  before  calling  on  General  Grant,  to  read  the  letter  to 
General  Rawlins,  then  acting  Secretary  of  War,  and  try  to  secure 
his  co-operation  with  us. 

On  the  following  day,  which  I  think  was  the  26th  of  June,  1869, 
Mr.  Lewis  went  to  Washington  and  was  absent  for  several  days.  On 
his  return,  he  informed  me  that  he  had  had  an  interview  with  General 
Rawlins  and  read  to  him  my  letter  to  the  President,  and  that  General 
Rawlins  had  expressed,  in  emphatic  terms,  his  concurrence  in  the 
views  expressed  in  it,  and  his  readiness  to  do  anything  in  his  power 
to  secure  the  revocation  of  General  Canby's  order.  Mr.  Lewis 
added  that  he  had  then  sealed  the  letter  and  delivered  it,  in  person, 
to  the  President,  who,  after  reading  it,  said  he  would  give  the  subject 
his  attention  without  delay.  But  he  gave  no  intimation  as  to  what 
his  action  would  be.  Of  course,  no  personal  answer  to  that  letter 
was  expected ;  but  the  official  response  was  awaited  with  intense 
anxiety,  as  much  of  weal  or  woe  to  the  Commonwealth  hung  upon  it. 
In  a  few  days,  the  response  came  in  the  most  acceptable  form  in  which 
it  could  have  been  presented,  viz.:  a  peremptory  mandate  to  General 
Canby  to  rescind  his  general  order. 

This  mandate  was  promptly  obeyed,  and  thus,  by  the  vigorous' 
and  patriotic  interposition  of  General  Grant,  the  last  obstacle  to  the 
deliverance  of  Virginia  from  tyrannical  misrule  was  removed.  The 
spirits  of  the  people  were  revived  ;  the  canvass  was  prosecuted  with 
renewed  vigor  and  energy.  Finally,  on  the  6th  of  July,  1869,  a 
glorious  victory  was  won  by  the  Conservatives.  The  Underwood 
Constitution  was  expurgated  of  its  test-oath  and  disfranchisements 
and  adopted  ;  Gilbert  C.  Walker  and  his  associates  were  elected  to  fill 
the  high  offices  for  which  they  had  respectively  been  nominated,  and 
a  Legislature  chosen  which  reflected  the  sentiment  of  the  people. 
Virginia  was  thus  practically  restored  to  her  place  in  the  Union  and 
her  citizens  reinvested  with  all  the  rights  of  freemen !  In  a  word, 
the  great  work  for  which  the  Committee  of  Nine  and  their  associates 
had  labored  so  faithfully  and  energetically  for  six  months,  in  the  face 


68  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA    TO   THE     UNION. 

of  the  storm  of  misrepresentation  and  obloquy  by  which  they  had 
been  assailed,  was  finished,  and  the  committee  were  able  to  retire 
from  the  field  of  action  with  the  proud  consciousness  that  the  results 
had  fully  demonstrated  the  wisdom  and  patriotism  of  their  conduct. 
I  cannot  close  this  "Narrative"  without  bearing  my  willing  and 
grateful  testimony  to  the  patriotic  and  magnanimous  conduct  of 
General  Grant  toward  the  people  of  Virginia  in  all  their  troubles. 
He  received  their  representatives  with  kindness  and  affability,  and 
extended  to  them  all  the  courtesy  which  was  due  to  them  as  gentle- 
men. He  listened  to  all  their  complaints  with  patience  and  close 
attention,  and  met  every  appeal  in  behalf  of  justice  to  Virginia  in  a 
spirit  of  fairness  and  generosity.  I  believed  in  1869  that  he  was  dis- 
posed to  make  every  concession  in  the  interests  of  peace  which  he 
could  make  consistently  with  his  obligations  to  the  party  which  had 
chosen  him  as  its  representative.  He  was  the  head  and  front  of  a 
great  party  flushed  with  victory  and  still  laboring  under  the  excite- 
ment of  the  recent  fierce  conflicts  of  the  war.  As  such  he  was  ne- 
cessarily a  party  man.  But  he  was  more.  He  was  a  patriot,  and 
in  the  eloquent  language  of  the  late  Hon.  William  C.  Rives,  he 
never  ceased  "to  remember  that  he  had  a  country  to  serve  as  well  as 
a  party  to  obey  "  ! 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION.  69 

ADDENDUM  TO  THE  FOREGOING  NARRATIVE. 


After  taking  leave  of  General  Grant  in  January,  1869,  in  Wash- 
ington, I  had  no  opportunity  of  meeting  him  again  personally  until 
25th  of  June,  1872. 

In  October,  1871,  a  vacancy  having  been  created  in  the  Board  of 
Directors  of  the  Trustees  of  the  Peabody  Education  Fund  by  the 
death  of  Admiral  Farragut,  one  of  the  original  trustees  appointed  by 
Mr.  Peabody,  I  was  elected  by  the  surviving  members  of  the  Board 
to  succeed  him  in  the  administration  of  this  beneficent  and  honor- 
able trust. 

At  the  next  succeeding  meeting  of  the  Board,  which  was  held  in 
Boston  on  the  25th  of  June,  1872,  I  took  my  seat  for  the  first  time  as 
a  member  of  the  body  of  which  General  Grant  was  also  a  member. 
In  this  way  we  were  brought  into  close  association  at  almost  all  the 
meetings  of  the  Board  which  were  held  from  1872  to  1884  inclusive. 
During  all  this  lapse  of  years,  while  there  was  nothing  like  intimacy 
between  us,  our  relations  were  uniformly  those  of  courtesy  and  good 
feeling. 

When  General  Grant  closed  his  earthly  career  on  the  23d  of  July, 
1885,  the  whole  country  was  filled  with  sympathy  and  sorrow  and 
mourning,  which  were  shared  in  full  measure  by  his  late  associate 
members  of  the  Peabody  Board. 

In  anticipation  of  the  next  ensuing  annual  meeting  of  the  Board, 
which  was  appointed  to  be  held  in  New  York  on  the  7th  day  of  Oc- 
tober, 1885,  I  received  a  note  from  Hon.  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  Presi- 
dent of  the  Board,  informing  me  that  he  understood  it  to  be  the  wish 
of  many  of  the  friends  of  General  Grant  that  I  should  prepare  and 
offer  the  formal  tribute  to  his  memory  and  character,  to  be  entered 
on  the  records  of  the  Board. 

I  must  acknowledge  that  this  indication  of  myself  to  perform  this 
delicate  and  important  duty  was  entirely  unexpected,  for  I  had  sup- 
posed it  would  have  been  devolved  on  ex-Secretary  of  State  Hon. 
Hamilton  Fish,  Hon.  William  M.  Evarts,  or  the  late  Chief  Justice, 
Morrison  R.  Waite,  who  were  also  members  of  the  Board,  and  whose 
personal  and  political  relations  to  General  Grant  had  been  of  a  much 
more  intimate  character  than  mine.  But  I  undertook  the  duty  with 
pleasure,  because  it  afforded  me,  the  only  representative  of  Virginia 
on  the  Board,  a  suitable  and  welcome  opportunity  of  speaking  in 


70  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE    UNION. 

such  terms  as  I  deemed  proper  in  commemoration  of  the  talents, 
public  services,  virtues,  and  catholic  patriotism  of  the  illustrious 
deceased,  and  more  especially  of  the  signal  assistance  which  he  had 
given  to  my  native  State  on  more  than  one  occasion  of  her  sorest 
need. 

In  pursuance  of  this  arrangement,  when  the  President,  the  Hon. 
Robert  C.  Winthrop,  had  closed  his  address  with  an  eloquent  and 
touching  reference  to  the  death  of  General  Grant,  I  addressed  the 
Board  as  follows : 

"  MR.  CHAIRMAN, — I  hope  I  shall  not  be  regarded  by  my  colleagues  as 
officious  or  obtrusive  in  moving  that  so  much  of  our  chairman's  address  as 
refers  to  the  death  of  General  Grant  be  referred  to  a  select  committee  of 
three,  to  consider  and  report  what  action  should  be  taken  by  the  Board  in 
relation  thereto. 

General  Grant,  though  a  native  and  resident  of  the  North,  in  fact  belonged 
to  the  whole  country,  and  it  has  seemed  to  me  that  it  would  tend  to  give 
emphasis  to  that  fact  if  the  movement  to  do  honor  to  his  memory  were  to 
come  from  a  Southern  man. 

I,  therefore,  as  the  representative  of  Virginia — a  State  which  was  under 
many  obligations  to  General  Grant — take  the  liberty  of  submitting  that 
motion." 

The  motion  was  passed,  and  Messrs.  Stuart,  Hayes  and  Manning  were 
appointed  the  committee. 

On  the  following  morning  I  submitted  the  paper,  which  I  had  pre- 
pared for  the  consideration  of  the  committee,  and  it  was  promptly 
and  unanimously  approved  by  them  without  modification  or  amend- 
ment, and  I  was  instructed  to  report  it  to  the  Board.  The  following 
is  the  minute  touching  this  report: 

Mr.  Stuart,  in  behalf  of  the  committee  to  consider  the  tribute  paid  to 
General  Grant,  submitted  the  following  report  and  resolutions,  which  were 
unanimously  adopted,  all  the  members  rising  when  the  question  was  put : 

The  committee  to  whom  was  referred  so  much  of  our  chairman's  open- 
ing address  as  refers  to  the  death  of  General  U.  S.  Grant  have  had  the  same 
under  consideration,  and  respectfully  submit  the  following 

REPORT. 

Death  has  again  broken  the  ranks  of  our  Board.  General  Ulysses  S. 
Grant,  the  laurel-crowned  warrior,  the  statesman  who  was  twice  elevated 
by  the  suffrages  of  the  American  people  to  the  Presidency  of  the  United 
States,  the  large-hearted  patriot  whose  affections  and  aspirations  during  life 
were  dedicated  to  his  country's  welfare  and  honor,  the  soldier  who  fought 
through  long  years  of  war  that  peace  and  all  its  attendant  blessings  might 
be  secured  to  his  countrymen,  has  been  summoned  from  our  side. 


RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE   UNION.  71 

He  went  to  his  grave  honored  and  lamented  by  men  of  all  sections,  and 
parties,  and  races.  Men  who  had  been  arrayed  against  him  on  the  battle- 
field twenty  years  ago  were  no  less  sincere  in  their  grief  for  his  death  than 
those  who  had  stood  by  his  side  in  the  deadly  encounters  of  war.  All  ap- 
preciated his  patriotic  purposes — all  admired  his  heroic  courage  and  stead- 
fastness— all  honored  his  truthfulness  and  fidelity  to  every  obligation.  Bold, 
fearless,  and  aggressive  in  war,  he  was  humane  and  magnanimous  in  the 
hour  of  victory.  When  mainly  through  his  efforts  civil  war  had  ceased,  he 
was  among  the  first  to  seek  to  calm  the  angry  passions  to  which  it  had  given 
birth,  and  to  invoke  the  blessings  of  peace  and  the  restoration  of  union  in 
fact  as  well  as  in  name. 

All  remember  how  his  patriotic  appeal  to  his  countrymen  at  the  com- 
mencement of  his  first  Presidential  term,  "Let us  have  peace,"  thrilled  the 
heart  of  every  true  American  from  the  "Lakes  to  the  Gulf,  and  from  the  At- 
lantic to  the  Pacific.  From  that  hour  to  the  close  of  his  earthly  career  there 
is  good  reason  to  believe  that  the  first  wish  of  his  heart  was  to  witness  the 
fulfilment  of  that  prayer.  When  he  stood,  as  it  were,  on  the  verge  of  the 
grave — when  his  mortal  frame  was  wasted  by  disease,  and  his  tongue  had 
lost  the  power  of  giving  utterance  to  the  thoughts  which  filled  his  great 
soul — he  made  the  hand  which  had  so  successfully  wielded  the  sword  in 
defence  of  the  Union  its  substitute,  to  record  his  gratitude  to  God  for  having 
permitted  him  to  live  long  enough  to  witness  the  restoration  of  union  and 
fraternity  between  his  lately  discordant  countrymen. 

These  noble  sentiments  sank  deeply  into  the  American  mind,  and 
awakened  an  echo  in  every  patriotic  heart.  When  he  was  stricken  with 
the  disease,  which  finally  proved  fatal,  the  hearts  of  the  people  of  all  sec- 
tions overflowed  with  sympathy,  and  when  the  end  came,  a  wail  of  grief 
was  heard  throughout  our  whole  country,  which  found  expression  in  popu- 
lar meetings,  through  the  public  press,  and  in  every  other  mode  of  testifying 
respect  and  affection  known  to  civilized  society,  and  his  obsequies  were 
celebrated  with  a  solemn  pomp  and  ceremony  unparalleled  in  our  country 
since  the  death  of  Washington. 

General  Grant  was  one  of  the  sixteen  original  trustees '  named  by  Mr. 
Peabody  himself  to  administer  his  beneficent  trust  in  behalf  of  the  illiterate 
children  of  the  Southern  States.  He  was  in  full  sympathy  with  the  purpose 
of  the  founder  of  the  trust,  and  earnestly  and  cordially  co-operated  with  his 
associates  in  their  efforts  to  fulfil  it. 

At  the  date  of  his  appointment,  he  was,  with  probably  one  exception, 
the  youngest  member  of  the  Board,  and  his  robust  frame  and  apparently 
vigorous  health  gave  promise  of  long  life.  But  as  it  has  pleased  Him,  in 
whose  hands  are  the  issues  of  life  and  death,  to  order  otherwise,  all  that, 
remains  for  us  is,  with  bowed  heads  and  reverent  hearts,  to  submit  to  His 
decree. 

Having  assembled  now  at  our  annual  meeting  for  the  first  time  since  this 
great  affliction  fell  upon  us,  we,  the  surviving  members  of  the  Board  of 
Trustees  of  the  Peabody  Educational  Fund,  gladly  embrace  the  opportunity 
to  place  on  our  official  records  this  testimonial  of  our  profound  esteem  for 


72  RESTORATION   OF   VIRGINIA   TO   THE   UNION. 

the  character  of  our  deceased  associate,  of  our  sincere  grief  at  his  loss,  and 
of  our  sympathy  with  his  widow  and  family  in  their  bereavement. 

Of  the  achievements  of  General  Grant,  as  a  soldier  and  a  statesman,  we 
have  purposely  forborne  to  speak  more  fully.  They  are  of  too  recent  date, 
and  in  some  respects  too  closely  connected  with  the  political  and  party  con- 
tests of  the  day  to  admit  of  impartial  judgment  by  contemporaries.  We 
therefore  remit  these  subjects  to  the  domain  of  history,  to  which  they 
properly  belong. 

But  there  are  aspects  of  his  character  and  attributes  of  his  nature  which 
elevate  him  far  above  the  plane  of  the  mere  politician.  Upon  these  all  can 
dwell  with  pleasure.  His  heroic  courage,  his  unselfish  devotion  to  his  coun- 
try, his  fidelity  to  his  friends,  and  his  magnanimity  to  those  who  had  been 
his  enemies,  his  prompt  obedience  to  every  call  of  duty,  and  his  broad  and 
catholic  patriotism,  which  embraced  in  its  scope  his  whole  country,  and 
ignored  all  sectional  divisions,  must  command  the  approval  of  all  good  men. 
Like  Washington,  he  believed  "the  union  of  the  States"  to  be  "  the  palla- 
dium of  our  political  safety  and  prosperity,"  and  no  one  was  more  prompt 
than  he  "to  frown  upon  the  first  dawning  of  every  attempt  to  alienate  any 
portion  of  our  country  from  the  rest,  or  to  enfeeble  the  sacred  ties  which 
now  link  together  the  various  parts." 

Whatever  differences  of  opinion  may  exist  as  to  the  wisdom  of  special  acts , 
which  he  felt  called  on  to  perform  during  his  long  and  brilliant  career,  few 
will  be  found  disposed  to  question  the  purity  of  his  motives,  and  a  still 
smaller  number  to  deny  his  title  to  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  most  illus- 
trious men  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

In  private  life  he  was  faithful  in  the  discharge  of  every  duty.  A  devoted 
husband,  an  affectionate  and  indulgent  father,  a  law-abiding  citizen,  a  kind 
neighbor,  a  courteous  and  affable  gentleman,  he  enjoyed  the  confidence  and 
esteem  of  all  who  knew  him,  and  few  had  warmer  and  more  steadfast  and 
devoted  friends. 

As  a  member  of  this  Board,  he  was  prompt  in  his  attendance  on  its  ses- 
sions, and  an  active  and  zealous  supporter  of  every  measure  proposed  by  it 
for  the  promotion  of  the  sacred  trusts  committed  to  its  charge,  and  the  sur- 
viving members  will  never  cease  to  deplore  the  loss  of  his  companionship 
and  the  withdrawal  ot  the  moral  weight  and  influence  which  his  great  name 
gave  to  the  deliberations  and  action  of  the  Board. 

RESOLUTIONS. 

Resolved,  That  the  foregoing  report  be  approved  and  adopted  by  the 
Board,  and  that  it  be  spread  at  large  on  our  record  as  a  heartfelt  though 
imperfect  tribute  of  affection  and  respect  by  the  surviving  members  of  the 
Board  to  the  memory  of  their  late  distinguished  associate. 

Resolved,  That  our  Chairman  be  requested  to  transmit  a  properly  authen- 
ticated copy  of  these  proceedings  to  the  widow  and  family  of  General  Grant, 
with  an  assurance  of  the  profound  sympathy  of  each  and  every  member  of 
the  Board  in  their  sore  bereavement. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


»n 


OISCHARGE-URI 
JAN  2  8  1980 


Form  L9-Series  4939 


3  1158  00556  1310 


LJC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA      000019352    4 


